What year is it?

The "current" year in the Forgotten Realms seems to be 1491. However, the is no particular reason you need to set your campaign in the current year. Indeed, there are probably more detailed reference materials around from 2nd edition days.

Parmandur said:

"Canonically" there is no precise year: the APs have no metaplot impact, and there is no advancing timeline at all any more. Just some suggestions that a DM can take or leave.

Click to expand...

Sure, I get that. For me this is just a fun exercise to see if we can narrow down the date despite WotC's apparent reluctance to commit. I know we could probably quibble about what counts as FR canon in 5th Edition, but assuming we treat recent WotC-published material as any sort of authority, it does seem like 1491 DR is a strong candidate for the current year.

As a complete aside (and with apologies for the double-post), I'm now wondering how aware of the date the inhabitants of the Realms are? Would there be celebrations as the year ticks over from 1499 to 1500 DR like there were on Earth in 1999?

I'd really love to know what percentage of folks that have an opinion on this date issue are actually running a 5E game in the FR.

My honest preference would be a reboot back to the time of the 1E boxed set. You could do it via a new Star Trek storyline - someone goes back in time and changes one little thing that results in the world unfolding slightly differently...

jgsugden said:

I'd really love to know what percentage of folks that have an opinion on this date issue are actually running a 5E game in the FR.

My honest preference would be a reboot back to the time of the 1E boxed set. You could do it via a new Star Trek storyline - someone goes back in time and changes one little thing that results in the world unfolding slightly differently...

Click to expand...

Go back in time to the first sundering and just very carefully NOT ACCIDENTALLY KILL THREE GODS. That's it. Just, the PCs have to go back in time and spend 2 weeks in a tavern very carefully NOT getting involved in the meta plot and NOT killing three gods and taking their places. Time ripples back to the present, Myth Drannor NEVER fell, none of the time skips and disasters (spell Plauge, Sunderings, etc) ever happened. Myth Drannor is a Magi-punk metropolis the size of Tokyo and New York merged, with Magic trains, and all the 6e FR campaigns are noir detective work in a magi-punk world. Also there are Warforged, and Air ships. Let me get my shoe horn and we can work on putting in Dragon Marks. What? I don't have an agenda, what are you talking about?

The assumed starting year is 998 YK, which is 998 years after the founding of the Kingdom of Galifar, 4 years after the Day of Mourning, and 2 years after the Treaty of Thronehold.

If you're referring to the year in the Realms: Don't know, don't care. The idea that a new player might just assume that they didn't have to specify a setting for a question like this because they perceive D&D and the Realms as synonymous was one of the things I figured would happen given the treatment of the settings in 5E, but was told I was just being silly.

Echohawk said:

Sure, I get that. For me this is just a fun exercise to see if we can narrow down the date despite WotC's apparent reluctance to commit. I know we could probably quibble about what counts as FR canon in 5th Edition, but assuming we treat recent WotC-published material as any sort of authority, it does seem like 1491 DR is a strong candidate for the current year.

Click to expand...

Fair enough: WotC has nothing to gain by establishing an ongoing chronological Canon, but plenty to lose. Doubt they ever will again.

Parmandur said:

Fair enough: WotC has nothing to gain by establishing an ongoing chronological Canon, but plenty to lose. Doubt they ever will again.

Click to expand...

Contrarily, I believe they will, but not in 5e. Wobbly Timeline vs Definite Timeline is a very thematic sort of thing IMO, and it seems like the sort of thing that will get changed with an edition change, especially if the Edition change involves the design team heads being changed.

So, I can totally see 6th or 7th edition eventually switching back to a very rigidly kept and followed timeline. Possibly to the extent of League adventures tracking in world month and date relative to real world month and date.

But, again, almost certainly not during 5e.

TiwazTyrsfist said:

Contrarily, I believe they will, but not in 5e. Wobbly Timeline vs Definite Timeline is a very thematic sort of thing IMO, and it seems like the sort of thing that will get changed with an edition change, especially if the Edition change involves the design team heads being changed.

So, I can totally see 6th or 7th edition eventually switching back to a very rigidly kept and followed timeline. Possibly to the extent of League adventures tracking in world month and date relative to real world month and date.

But, again, almost certainly not during 5e.

Click to expand...

I don't see what the business case for a metaplot returning would be: any value added seems minimal, whereas it would actively alienate people setting their game in another timeframe. I doubt the current approach to RPG timelines will change, even if other elements get changed.

Parmandur said:

I don't see what the business case for a metaplot returning would be: any value added seems minimal, whereas it would actively alienate people setting their game in another timeframe. I doubt the current approach to RPG timelines will change, even if other elements get changed.

Click to expand...

The fact of the mater is, presence of meta-plot and a living timelined campaign setting (or multiple settings), is a pure mater of personal taste. My view is that the the divide is 33/33/33.

-1/3rd HATE setting meta-plot, they tend to say things like "This robs us of agency, it's railroading the game on the highest level, it can really screw characters in living campaigns (Divine caster who's god dies)". They consider it ESPECIALLY EGREGIOUS when tie in novels effect the setting meta plot. These players tend to vomit blood when someone nearby mentions Dragonlance.

-1/3rd LOVE setting meta-plot, they tend to say things like "It keeps the setting fresh, by running these adventures players get to be involved in events that shape the campaign world, it really gives the campaign a sense of continuity". They either don't care, or actively enjoy that Tie in Novels (which they read voraciously) affecting the Meta-Plot. These players tend to say "When oh when are they finally going to release a Dragonlance setting book for the current edition".

-1/3rd either don't care, or if they do have an opinion either way, it's not strong enough to matter beyond a general "I prefer [blank] but whatever"


So, at least in my opinion, the presence of a Meta-Plot and a continually advancing timeline in the game setting has NO business effect either for OR against. Business and sales lost on one side of the equation are made up by gains on the other side, and when the pendulum swings the other way, business and sales lost on the other side are made up by gains on the first.


Therefore, the presence of "Meta-plot" and "Enforced Timeline" within the game line is really a matter of the preference of the game design leads. Hasbro has a history of doing random shake-ups, particularly of cleaning house in a division around line changes like game editions or toy line changes. So, IF, when they decide it's time for 6e, they put someone in-charge of D&D who likes meta-plot and firm timelines, that's what 6e will have. And if not, then not.


TLDR: It's not a business consideration, it's purely the taste of game-line heads.