General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
I think what needed to happen was a great encyclopedia of the Realms, released in both hardbound and electronic editions. Unifying much of the lore would be a great help to GMs and having a single source would be amazing. As it is, if one wants to run a cannon-heavy game, one has to use the Forgotten Realms Candlekeep Index quite a bit to find all the references to a particular person or place. There are a great many details that reside within 1st and 2nd edition FR books. Prior to WotC removing their old PDFs, it was a lot easier to suggest purchasing these books for cheap and checking them when need be.
I am surprised no one has mentioned the above linked Wiki, it is an invaluable resource, if like GMforPowergamers you only have the Campaign Setting book. It is the only reason I even thought about putting together a campaign in Faerūn. Which I have done, it is sitting in files on my PC to take to Kuwait this winter.
I find that for fluff it is much better and easier then wading through dozens of books.
As to "canon lawyers", not much can be done if you have one, that hinders rather than helps the plot, at your table.
Because we read. You read everywhere about FR's baggage. I've had my issues with FR, and I've read my issues echoed dozens or even hundreds of times. You almost never read this sort of thing about Eberron or any other setting. Other settings don't have this level of canon expectations combined with a SW/Trekkie level of fanism.
FR has no baggage to a hardcore fan. The setting for over a decade catered to hardcore fans. It got to the point where the canon became and end in itself and reading FR campaign books for canon started overshadowing actually playing games there. The same things that catered to the hardcore fan are the same things bystanders call "baggage" and "more hassle than the setting is worth".
The issue comes when you ask the question of whether Forgotten Realms is the flagship setting of D&D. Historically speaking, this is what Forgotten Realms is. Thanks to how the setting has been handled(FR for the FR fans), it hasn't served mainstream D&D well in this regard.
Because we read. You read everywhere about FR's baggage. I've had my issues with FR, and I've read my issues echoed dozens or even hundreds of times. You almost never read this sort of thing about Eberron or any other setting.
Well, you're saying exactly what I thought you might say, which is that you're relying on assuming a meaning to what people don't say, which I've found to often be quite misleading, especially when you've got something as popular as the Forgotten Realms. It actually tends to be quite deceptive, and may be giving you the illusion that others don't have these problems.
I am surprised no one has mentioned the above linked Wiki, it is an invaluable resource, if like GMforPowergamers you only have the Campaign Setting book.
Well, you're saying exactly what I thought you might say, which is that you're relying on assuming a meaning to what people don't say, which I've found to often be quite misleading, especially when you've got something as popular as the Forgotten Realms. It actually tends to be quite deceptive, and may be giving you the illusion that others don't have these problems.
I suggest conducting more thorough research.
This sort of elitist attitude doesn't really help. Say that you have a problem or that there is a problem with Forgotten Realms and people tend to insinuate that the problem is with you, not the Realms. This is the sort of fan attitude that builds a wall keeping out new players.
People gripe about Eberron all the time. They gripe about not liking the flavor for the most part. Maybe I should have been specific in that the criticisms leveled against FR seem fairly unique to FR.
People gripe about Eberron all the time. They gripe about not liking the flavor for the most part. Maybe I should have been specific in that the criticisms leveled against FR seem fairly unique to FR.
It may to you, but, my experience is that there is nothing unique about this particular criticism.
And as for attitudes go, well, I find it offensive whenever I see people making an assumption based on the terms you have, whether it be a RPG subject, a computer one, or almost anything else you might name. So it's not a Realms thing for me, I apply it to a wide variety.
Last edited by Bumbles; 4th July 2009 at 02:59 AM..
FR's biggest issue is that it has an image problem. FR fans tend to be the trekkies of the D&D world, with all that entails. Its an exclusive club that tends to be off-putting to those not already inside. In addition, this image problem doesn't exist to FR fans themselves for the most part, and they don't really see or understand it. There are also entire libraries of canon which in popular perception the game "must" be true to, which can be daunting to the outsider. Unlike Star Trek where you can watch shows/movies and not have to deal with Trekkies, playing D&D is a group activity where playing in FR makes it more difficult to avoid FR fanism.
This level of canon expectations and fan furor doesn't really exist for other settings, other than possibly Vampire: the Masquerade during its heyday.
A setting should not have expectations so strong that a DM could end up ridiculed or harrassed by his players for getting the setting "wrong".
Well, some players are rules-lawyers and some players are setting-lawyers... that's the way it has been, and such behaviour is not restricted to RPGs only. I don't think Eberron hardcore fans are any different from FR "canon lawyers", and although there's a difference in amount of published material, Eberron isn't exactly "lore light" setting either... especially for a new DM.
FR's biggest issue is that it has an image problem.
I don't think this image problem is a real issue. It may be the biggest issue for you, but for me? It doesn't even track. Not even with the image you have of it.
If anything, the real issue I see is a conflict between people's expectations which is so widespread that I would suggest learning to deal with that conflict on its own. You can run into it without expecting it, including with as I mentioned before, carrots.
Quote:
This level of canon expectations and fan furor doesn't really exist for other settings, other than possibly Vampire: the Masquerade during its heyday.
Again, me, I've run into people of all stripes with those kinds of expectations without anything to do with the Realms. Maybe it's the experiences we've had which is coloring our different perceptions.
I don't think this image problem is a real issue. It may be the biggest issue for you, but for me? It doesn't even track. Not even with the image you have of it.
Are you an existing Forgotten Realms fan? Why would you have this issue if you are an existing fan? I could imagine this problem being difficult to see in others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bumbles
If anything, the real issue I see is a conflict between people's expectations which is so widespread that I would suggest learning to deal with that conflict on its own. You can run into it without expecting it, including with as I mentioned before, carrots.
So, you're saying that if people have an issue with FR, it is an issue with them and not with FR. I hear FR fans say this a lot. Its not really a welcoming attitude.
If anything, the real issue I see is a conflict between people's expectations which is so widespread that I would suggest learning to deal with that conflict on its own. You can run into it without expecting it, including with as I mentioned before, carrots.
I don't belive this for one moment. I never herd of this problem until long after I found it myself. I spent years thinking it was my group only that had it. Then and only then did I hear other people had the exact same problem...
now on the internet it is common to complain about it. So the defualt answer fans through around is "If you never herd of the problem you never would have seen it..."
the problem is I found the problem without any help...so did others.
If the problem is not real why do so many find it on there own??
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remathilis
Planescape
It should be given special award to Die Vecna, Die: a module that manages to trash no less than THREE different settings (Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Planescape) in the course of one module.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remathilis
Those of you who fretted that monsters have too many hp and fights take too long: meet the barbarian. The ULTIMATE "Lets speed this combat up, I need to whiz" class!
Define your term, then I can possibly answer it in some meaningful way.
Otherwise I'll just say I've read some of the novels, but haven't bought a FR product since 1st edition, though I've read some of the books published since, and played games set in it. And yes, I have run into situations where there have been conflicts regarding canon-issues. But I don't believe it's a FR problem since I've run into so many of them outside the FR games I've played.
Quote:
Why would you have this issue if you are an existing fan? I could imagine this problem being difficult to see in others.
Oh, I see the "problem" of people having a conflict regarding canon all the time. I just don't see it as a FR problem in particular, as much as a player one that can hit any subject, anywhere. Hence my suggestion of dealing with it on those terms, and not try to fix the Realms.
Seriously, if you're being ridiculed or harassed by your players, find new players.
Quote:
So, you're saying that if people have an issue with FR, it is an issue with them and not with FR. I hear FR fans say this a lot. Its not really a welcoming attitude.
That is not what I was saying. Your understanding of my words is in error. Since I've clarified it above, I'll refrain from doing it further, and just ask you to re-read what I've said.
And let's leave off the comments as to attitude, that sort of thing is going to create problems. Thanks in advance.
Last edited by Bumbles; 4th July 2009 at 04:21 AM..
Well, you can doubt my experiences, but I don't know how I can convince you of their reality. I'm not about to invite you into my life.
Maybe you could write some fan-fiction in another setting, or get involved in some historical re-enactment, or try gaming in some non-FR settings, but me, I don't know what I can do, as I see it as something you'd have to experience for yourself.
Quote:
I never herd of this problem until long after I found it myself. I spent years thinking it was my group only that had it. Then and only then did I hear other people had the exact same problem...
This realization would make me think "Hmm, maybe there are some non-FR subjects where this happens too" but then, I did run into this problem before I ran into it with the FR. Might even have been before I ran into the Realms, I'm honestly not sure.
This realization would make me think "Hmm, maybe there are some non-FR subjects where this happens too" but then, I did run into this problem before I ran into it with the FR. Might even have been before I ran into the Realms, I'm honestly not sure.
I've run into the "canon lawyering" problem in other rpg games, such as Marvel Superheros, DC Heros, various Star Wars rpgs, etc ...
Typically they're properties which have a lot of previous stuff written for it, such as background splatbooks, novels, comic books, movies, television shows, etc ...
Well, the more content you have, the more possibility you have of conflict seeping in. Especially since content will come about as there are more fans, which increases the chance you'll run into somebody. But there's people out there who will quibble if you do things wrong based on their reading of a single short story.
ETA: OTOH, there are people who can read dozens of books for a setting, and not look for any particular nit-picking canon. Me, I'm one of them. Read lots of books, I rarely notice any inconsistencies unless they're particularly egregious.
Last edited by Bumbles; 4th July 2009 at 06:36 AM..
Unfortunately, no, it doesn't. I use the wiki on occasion, but most pages are very low in detail, meaning I usually have to go to the primary sources to get anything other than the most cursory outline.
I've run into the "canon lawyering" problem in other rpg games, such as Marvel Superheros, DC Heros, various Star Wars rpgs, etc ...
Typically they're properties which have a lot of previous stuff written for it, such as background splatbooks, novels, comic books, movies, television shows, etc ...
You know, I think this is an interesting point to me, though probably for reasons you were not intending.
Canon lawyering is indeed quite common, but it is particularly common for things that have "lots of previous stuff", in other words they are adaptations of things that were not originally intended to be used as settings for many new original stories created by hundreds of different fans and DMs. For such settings, large quantities of canon are simply going to exist regardless of anyone's intentions, and are a necessary evil with regards to fan fiction and RPG campaigns.
However, D&D campaign settings are a different case. Ideally, and unlike the examples you listed, such settings are in fact designed with the idea that they will be used to create countless different and likely contradictory works of campaigns and fan fiction. Treating such a setting as like the DC universe, the Star Wars universe, or any other setting defined by a central ongoing story, may well be a mistake, because treating it in such a way may take away from the intended primary goal of that kind of setting: to be a resource for creating new campaigns in a fun and easy manner. In such a case, canon goes from being a necessary evil to simply being an evil.
To be perfectly honest, this is why I like Eberron and its approach to canon. No Eberron novel is canonical, no novel can change the setting, there is no ongoing story that progresses across editions, there are no central heroic characters, there are many concepts and secrets within the setting that are officially off-limits for the establishment of canonical descriptions or explanations (WotC will not create a canonical explanation for the cause of the Mourning, among other things), and many significant elements of the setting are left intentionally vague and self-contradictory (Kaius's motivations, the nature of the Lord of Blades, the goals of the Daughters of Sora Kell, etc). Eberron deliberately avoids the establishment of canon and leaves room for DMs to fill in the holes, which is something I consider to be a necessary step for making a setting that is flexible enough to let DMs to simultaneously use a setting as written and change things around or invent things to suit the needs of a campaign.
Of course, I should also admit that I really don't like many of the later 3E splatbooks for Eberron simply because they diminish the flexibility of the setting that was established in the original ECS. In fact, I have already tangled with a couple Eberron canon lawyers who were a bit too stuck up on one interpretation of some bit of canon from a later splatbook that probably wasn't all that well thought out in the first place. Ugh...
To get back to my point, I guess I will say that Forgotten Realms may be connected to so many complaints about canon lawyering and such simply because it modeled itself on things like Star Wars continuity or the DC universe more than it should have, when a different approach works better for something that needs to be as open and flexible as a D&D campaign setting.
I guess I will say that Forgotten Realms may be connected to so many complaints about canon lawyering and such simply because it modeled itself on things like Star Wars continuity or the DC universe more than it should have
Something like this could have happened unintentionally, due to things like poor editorial oversight and neglect.
To get back to my point, I guess I will say that Forgotten Realms may be connected to so many complaints about canon lawyering and such simply because it modeled itself on things like Star Wars continuity or the DC universe more than it should have, when a different approach works better for something that needs to be as open and flexible as a D&D campaign setting.
I think that's right. I think the reason is that TSR published it as a campaign setting, but then realised they were making more money from the FR novels than from the RPG materials. So the needs of the novels (for continuity) outweighed the needs of the RPG product (as a playable setting).
A setting should not have expectations so strong that a DM could end up ridiculed or harrassed by his players for getting the setting "wrong".
That comment says more about the players than the DM. When FR campaigns "go bad" it's usually because of what the players bring to the table, not what the DM dishes up.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
