D&D 5E Campaign Settings 5e- Why I want to Forget the Realms

[epithet]

Thank you for trying to assign motivations to those of us who dislike the FR; and by "thank you" I mean "Your position on my feelings is not only wrong, but nearly insulting."

My dislike of the FR has nothing to do with its popularity. Back when Greyhawk was all the rage, I loved it- and it wasn't despite its popularity; its popularity was irrelevant to my feelings. My dislike of the FR- and I speak only for myself, since I know that there are many reasons to dislike anything- is born from a host of factors, several of which I mentioned upthread. The Mary Sues, the "we'll shoehorn anything in here!" aesthetic, the fact that it is and probably always will be the same cast of NPCs, no matter how often they die, go to Hell or advance time a century or two, the fact that there is (IMHO) almost nothing original in the whole setting, the fact that the tone is so... syrupy, the fact that there are periodic FR-shaking events used every time there's an edition change, the fact that... well, I could go on, but I'm not trying to persuade anyone of anything other than to stop casting aspersions at the motivations of others for liking or disliking what they do.

I wonder if one of the reasons I like Greyhawk so much is that it hasn't been officially worked over for each new edition. Even the Greyhawk Wars, way back when, was an event on a mortal scale, even if it had some immortal actors. If WotC published a product line that had Pelor and Nerull and a bunch of other gods kill each other and be brought back by some uber-god-thing, destroy half of Oerth with a planar conjunctiwhatsit and then magic wand it all back together, and hit fast forward for a couple hundred years but keep all the same NPCs in the world as if it had all been JR Ewing's dream...

I'd be mad as hell.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I wonder if one of the reasons I like Greyhawk so much is that it hasn't been officially worked over for each new edition. Even the Greyhawk Wars, way back when, was an event on a mortal scale, even if it had some immortal actors. If WotC published a product line that had Pelor and Nerull and a bunch of other gods kill each other and be brought back by some uber-god-thing, destroy half of Oerth with a planar conjunctiwhatsit and then magic wand it all back together, and hit fast forward for a couple hundred years but keep all the same NPCs in the world as if it had all been JR Ewing's dream...

I'd be mad as hell.

That's part of the deal when you play in a pre-existing world. The fiction is shaped by the fact that it is a game setting, and vice versa. When taken as a whole, yes it can seriously push the believability of the setting. I agree with all of that.

I just think that there's a simple solution to it all. In my FR, I use the Time of Troubles as an event that happened a while back (although much less complex than the novels) and not a whole lot since then except the return of the Shades.

To be honest, I don't really understand what they did with the setting for 4th edition, both the Spellplague and the Sundering are nebulous events that I just ignore. It hasn't been a problem. I've never had to tell people what year it is in my campaign, and to be honest, I don't know for sure. Probably like 25 years after the Time of Troubles.

So while I understand the criticisms of the setting, I just don't see them as that big a problem.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

At that point, why bother with the Realms at all? Why not just write your own campaign setting?

Because making maps, places, history is more of a pain in the butt than saying "these 5 dudes don't exist in this alternate reality Forgotten Realms".

And honestly, most players couldn't care less about this sort of thing. They show up to the game, want to have a good time, and get in character. Most players I've found are at most just casually invested in the world. If you get them to know the main gods and the major countries in the region, you've beaten the spread in terms of player buy-in. And honestly, that should be about all that's needed to go on a typical adventure.

Worries about FR "PC disempowerment" is borrowing trouble that doesnt exist unless you have a certain type of player - we'll call him That Friggin Guy (TFG). And if you do, TFG is going to be whining that the king of whatever kingdom isn't throwing magic items, gold, troops, etc at them to solve whatever major high level arc you have going on in your home brew world the same as he will be that the Knights of Myth Drannor aren't outfitting him to fight the equivalent in FR. Fluff isnt enjoyable set dressing for TFG, but something to also master and club the DM over the head to get their way. If TFG is going to complain that the Lusty Owlbear Pub isn't in Baldur's Gate but actually Hillsfar, he's going to call you on whatever discrepancy exists in your own game. It's not a setting issue, it's a player personality issue.

Moreover, it shouldnt even matter in a low to mid level FR game. Elminster or Good Guy X from your homebrew doesnt have time to go stop gnolls from getting up to gnoll activities. And really only TFG is stewing in the knowledge that somewhere in your world, someone is higher level than them, so that makes their special snowflake somehow less special. The rest of the players are going to just go on the damn adventure and have fun.

 

[Staffan]

And honestly, most players couldn't care less about this sort of thing. They show up to the game, want to have a good time, and get in character. Most players I've found are at most just casually invested in the world. If you get them to know the main gods and the major countries in the region, you've beaten the spread in terms of player buy-in. And honestly, that should be about all that's needed to go on a typical adventure.

That's a very good point. Most people I've played with just want to sit down and kill some orcs, and the world is just a place in which they can do that. They don't worry much about the world beyond what's on-screen, so I've never had a problem with a player saying "You know what, this is too much for us. Let's go to Shadowdale and tell Elminster about it and let him deal with it."

Most criticism of this kind of thing comes from DMs who do know their settings and weigh them against one another. But the players? It'd be a victory to get them to read a four-page primer on the setting.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

What an odd thing to say.

I don’t know about you, but I didn’t see—nor did I agree with—the following statement: “All people who dislike or complain about the Realms do so only because the setting is popular.”

What I agreed with was this: “It honestly looks more like complaints about something just because it's popular.” –a statement, mind, made at the end of a multi-paragraph post that quoted somebody else, not you, Jester.

In my time online I’ve seen people who are happy to jump on the hate bandwagon, fling poo at anyone who likes something, then adopt the stance of the aggrieved party when the poo gets thrown back, which they use to justify stirring things up even more.

I’ve also seen people like you who honestly don’t like something.

So relax. Though I can't speak for Hussar, I am pretty sure he wasn't talking to you. And neither was I.

so instead you think it is ok to passive aggresvly say "Not you one person but SOME of there other people?" if you don't know why someone doesn't like something don't pretend you do... again "It's popular" has never been the reason given by anyone I have ever known...

 

[hawkeyefan]

so instead you think it is ok to passive aggresvly say "Not you one person but SOME of there other people?" if you don't know why someone doesn't like something don't pretend you do... again "It's popular" has never been the reason given by anyone I have ever known...

Well to be fair, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. People do that all the time. I know people who can't stand A Song Of Ice and Fire now that everyone knows about it from Game of Thrones. I know people who can't stand bands that they used to love once they reach a certain level of notoriety. Plenty of folks hate the Yankees or the Patriots or any other successful sports team that is often liked beyond its hometown area.

People can be absolute contrarians about matters of taste. However, you're right that they will rarely ever admit it....they will usually provide plenty of other reasons for their hate.

I'm not saying that's what's happening here...I think there have been plenty of genuine criticisms of the Realms in this thread. But that kind of thing does happen.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

So instead you think it is ok to passive aggressively say...

Eh?

I'm pretty sure I was as straightforward as I could be when I wrote this:

That’s exactly what it is.

"It's popular" has never been the reason given by anyone I have ever known...

If someone decides to jump on the Let's Bash the Forgotten Realms! bandwagon, they rarely ever feel compelled to explain why they did so.

It's about the thrill of the ride in a theme park where nobody knows your real name, not about opening up and having an honest conversation with people who share a similar interest in D&D, but differ in their taste for published campaign settings.

In fact, I have only seen one person cop to it. On the WotC forums, about eight years ago.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Players can be divided into two groups-
The first group are those that can hardly be bothered to read what their own class can do. "I hit it with my weapon. I kill it real good."

The second group are those that know everything (or think they do) and constantly look for ways to break the system for their own advantage. "When I use that feat as a bonus action after that spell, I do 500d6 damage and transform into a GOD! The rules say so!"

The third group are the innumerate.

I'd argue you can be invested in the game, and not the lore. Not everyone who doesnt care about the setting minutia is some mouth breather who can barely be bothered to pay attention heh.

My current game is set in Golarion. The party ran afoul of the church of Norgorber, the god of murder, greed, and secrets, and the priest they were fighting got away. Apparently nothing infuriates them more than a bad guy slipping through their fingers, so two of them decided their new goal was to mess with the church in what they termed "Operation Screw Norgoblin" (I dont think they initially even knew the god's name) . So they printed up the equivalent of Tiajuana Bibles/Chick Tracts featuring the god in compromising positions and invented new absurd church "teachings". They dumped thousands of gold into making these, complete with hiring casters to weave non-detection spells on them to prevent the printing press operators from being horribly killed afterwards. They found out some holy days and set about disrupting them. They cared about the lore, because it was relevant to the story they wanted to pursue.

They don't know who the king of their country is, or care about recent major wars. They don't really care about the history of the world unless it's relevant at that exact moment. I think a lot of DM's get kind of masturbatory in our world building - lots of this stuff we come up with never gets revealed to the players so it's basically just for our own amusement (I lump myself in there as well). So this level of lore fetish gets projected onto players in worrying about a lot of "what ifs" that just arent going to play out. GMforPowergamers' account is honestly the first time I've really heard of this being an actual impediment to play. But it sounds like the same type of players would have been like that in any world they knew, because it was a way to get the upper hand or "win" through having NPC's do all the heavy lifting. YMMV of course.

 

[Mephista]

(the "hipster" argument, aka, "Look, it's another Drizzt")

The hipster argument. That made me laugh. I've had people accuse me of trying to make a Drizz't clone when I did a wood elf ranger once. Nevermind that I was just interested in an elf ranger because I wanted to try a woodsy character. Wood elf seemed a natural fit.

I complained about ALL the chosen and ALL the big npcs... SO IT ISNT NOBODY!!! Now why didn't I mention them all by name? Because I don't want to spend the time researching stuff I don't like...if I was going to research 500+ books (novels and supliments) I would like the realms and use it... We are talking el munchkin because he is the worst...

So, you're complaining about someone you don't know about? That doesn't strike you as strange? "I don't know anything about Farideh but she's just terrible!"

By your own admission, you haven't even done any research to see if the popular characters are the worst. That, and the random insults, pretty much makes any claims you make seem hollow. A hyper focus on one or two characters is rather suspect.