D&D 5E 5E Forgotten Realms: what will it look like?

[ForeverSlayer]

That will not mean much if;

• The reading grade level is still rotten.
• The word count is way down.
• The art is mediocre.
• Too much of the setting is given over to an extremely generic new land no one cares about.
• The interesting places have been nuked and the generic places are even more generic.

Okay let me rephrase that.

Increased book count with greater quality is what I want.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I'd have to agree with that. Aside from the cover layout (which I generally quite like) I have to say that 4e in general has been a general downgrade in art and design.

And more distinctive. The FR and Eberron books for 3e felt and looked setting-specific. The 4e books, on the other hand, look like what they more or less are: supplements for the main D&D game.

When I bought the 3rd edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide I actually felt like I got my money's worth and then some.

When I got the 4th edition one I felt like I was cheated.

 

[The Human Target]

I would hope for a greatest hits type version.

 

[rounser]

People, I think, are more forgiving of changes like these because they made FR more unique, not less unique, which I understand. That doesn't mean they weren't huge changes.

I disagree. Monkeying with the planes strikes me as a way of stamping authorial identity on something that already exists, whilst changing nothing important. The effect of the planar change on the look and feel of 3E FR was pretty much zero unless you explicitly took the PCs planehopping.

4E FR on the other hand hamhandedly shoehorns and retcons in entire new aesthetically wonky 4E races like eladrin and dragonborn, kills off all the NPCs, nukes certain areas whilst leaving others unrealistically completely unchanged, and borrows rather obviously from Eberron in multiple ways, as if that wasn't doing as well as expected so FR can be surrogate Eberron. And the map changed a lot and looked bad to boot. And FR became a place that former non-fans of the setting now liked, at the expense of existing fans who walked away in droves. And the 3E FR book is one of the most beautiful and well written setting books ever produced for any RPG, which throws it's successor into sharp relief in comparison.

Oh, and the setting got simplified so that authors wouldn't have to do their homework in writing for it, too. Nevermind that rich detail of Realmslore was a main draw for FR fans. And they killed Mystra again, which was just cross-eyed stupid unnecessary to those who had been following the setting, and looks like a thought bubble from someone unfamiliar with FR who just tuned in.

This was no From the Ashes reboot of Greyhawk, which has many redeeming features from the fan's perspective (even as it did turn many off). Most of FR 4E's virtues are only in a meta sense, like "shoehorns 4E races and classes into FR" and "makes FR less detailed so as not to intimidate authors and newbies". In other words, compromises made to satisfy political needs that have little to do with producing a quality setting. Yes, this has been done before with all assassins and monks disappearing, but what 4E FR did is much more on the nose and in your face than that.

 

[kitsune9]

I'm kind of hoping they reset the clock back on FR if they are going "back to basics" on 5e.

 

[Grumpy RPG Reviews]

[FONT=&quot]

4E FR on the other hand hamhandedly shoehorns and retcons in...

I agree with rounser on all those point. I did a review of the 4E FR and studied the books are discovered this;
[/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot] Based on word-count calculations, the campaign section in 4E is home to about 64K words while the 3E section offered 67K words, or 3K words more. [/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]This is compounded by the fact that of the 150 pages in the 4E book, only 118 pages are actually about Faerun – or 15 pages shorter than it was in 3E. The other 32 pages are on how the underdark sucks more balls than ever before and a new continent hammered into the setting like a square peg into a round hole.[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot] Based on the expanded white space and reduced actual page count, 4E offers 12K fewer words on Faerun (the section on the setting proper) than the 3E book. Even if the 4E book pages are magic, holding more words than that amount of white space and font size actually allows and both books have 500 words per page, then the reduction in page count alone means 4E is home to 7K fewer words about Faerun.[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]The text in 3E appears to average around 10th grade level while the text in 4E however around 7th grade. Not only are there fewer words in 4E, the writing that does appear is intended for people who find it hard to read text books for high school freshmen. [/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot] The history section covers less than two pages and if it is that irrelevant then why include it at all? [/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]The entire book feels organized backwards – the adventuring chapter should have been called an appendix, as it is a grab bag of material and should have been placed at the end of the book followed by an adventure.[/FONT]

 

[ferratus]

[FONT=&quot]
[*][FONT=&quot]This is compounded by the fact that of the 150 pages in the 4E book, only 118 pages are actually about Faerun – or 15 pages shorter than it was in 3E. The other 32 pages are on how the underdark sucks more balls than ever before and a new continent hammered into the setting like a square peg into a round hole.[/FONT]

Though to be fair, returned Abeir is far less of a square peg than Maztica, Zakhara, Kara-Tur, or Mulhorand.

[*][FONT=&quot]The text in 3E appears to average around 10th grade level while the text in 4E however around 7th grade. Not only are there fewer words in 4E, the writing that does appear is intended for people who find it hard to read text books for high school freshmen.

I'm not sure if that's a problem myself. If it is, I'll happily offer up my own favoured campaign setting (Dragonlance) as something directed at younger readers of 12-14 years of age. But then, I've said before I'd happily trade 5 fatbeards for one 12 year old D&D player to make the hobby healthier and happier.

 

[Li Shenron]

5e is supposed to support all styles of play, characters built in a fashion resembling each edition, and all of them can be played at the same table at the same time!

So clearly, 5e Forgotten Realms will support playing in all eras of FR timeline, so that each player can play in their favourite, all of them at the same table at the same time!

 

[Sylrae]

Though to be fair, returned Abeir is far less of a square peg than Maztica, Zakhara, Kara-Tur, or Mulhorand.

I disagree about mulhorand, but its worth noting that if you dont like Maztica, Kara Tur, or Zakhara, They're detailed in their own books instead of the main FRCS. The FRCS treats those continents as blank, so if you dont like Maztica, you can easily ignore it, or even put something else on the continent.

With "Returned Abeir" its forced in your face, wasting your faerun page count, and players are therefore also more likely to nag you to allow a "returned abeir" character.

So in the 4e FRCG, you have less content on Faerun, an invasive square peg in a round hole that if you dont like, is taking up a hefty chunk of book space, which will bring you more arguments and hassles from players who will assume you Should be using it because its in the frcg.

- less faerun.
- new setting forcefed to you.
- extra chances for arguments.
- loads of retcons.

I read it a bit on my flgs, and decided it wasnt worth my money.

 

[Grumpy RPG Reviews]

I disagree about mulhorand, but its worth noting that if you dont like Maztica, Kara Tur, or Zakhara...

I agree with Sylrae and point out that of these settings, only Mazteca and Mulhorand were demonstrably destroyed in the 4E FR. Zakhara and Kara Tur were not mentioned, thus their status has probably not been changed.

And seriously, if you can't do something with Fantasy Egypt sending its imperial armies out conquering its neighbors, making the Red Wizards nervous.... I humbly suggest you are not trying hard enough.