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

[Agamon]

I suppose there's a reflexive "haters going to hate" response. I thought I was fairly clear with this, but I will try one more time- I love different campaign settings. I never like FR. I was hoping to find out what was going on with FR and 5e in general, in the future, and whether it might be worth it to revisit it (is it me? is it the campaign? should I try cilantro again, or am I trapped in a field of cilantro?).

Hmmm. Well, it's a bit tough to tell you whether the stuff you hate about it is still around if you don't remember why you hate it. I could say the high level NPC thing isn't a problem any more, but then it's never been a problem the few times I've run in FR. Drizzt, Elminster, et al, have never made an appearance in any game I've run. The high level of setting detail that some people don't like sure isn't there (in fact, the current complaint is that there isn't enough). Some simply don't like it because its popular, which it still is obviously, or WotC wouldn't be focusing on it. Some don't like it because it's "generic Tolkien fantasy." But if you like Greyhawk, I'm guessing that's not an issue.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Agamon]

In GH, you would read about the invoked devastation, and there would be the Sea of Dust. It would give you some campaign ideas. There were unexplained mysteries everywhere.
In FR, on the other hand, it always felt like the similar story would be, "And here's Elminster, staving off the invoked devastation caused by powerful NPC, except he is betrayed by Drizzt, who was controlled by other powerful NPC, which caused this place to be wiped off the map. Your adventure is to go and much about and learn about the cool things they did."

This is a misperception. Actually, it was accurate in 2e, I guess. Adventures from the 90's certainly did involve powerful NPCs, were railroady and marysue-ish, and generally terrible. But since 3e, FR has been "these guys exist, but use or ignore them how ever you want."

 

[CrusaderX]

I have been running my first 5e campaign after an absence from D&D, and, for the most part, is has been enjoyable. I've adjusted the materials (so far, we are about to complete Phandelver) so that it is set in Greyhawk- boxed set, circa 1983 (more open ended).

Greyhawk is my favorite campaign setting, mainly for nostalgic reasons. And I would run a Greyhawk game exactly like you're doing, circa the 1983 boxed set.

But I don't dislike the Forgotten Realms, and honestly, I find Greyhawk and the Realms very similar for gaming purposes. Both are medieval fantasy. Both are large worlds where I cannot possibly incorporate every NPC character or geographical location into my game. I pick and choose what I use and focus on in Greyhawk. I would do the same for the Realms. And I would use the either the 3rd Edition FR Campaign Setting, or the upcoming Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, similar to how I would use the 1983 Greyhawk boxed set. As a backdrop and springboard for games that I make my own.

 

[Jester David]

There's something close to 320 Forgotten Realms novels. 28 feature Drizzt and and maybe a dozen feature Elminster. That's 12.5%. Literally 87.5% of the Realms has nothing to do with those characters.

 

[Mercurius]

There's something close to 320 Forgotten Realms novels. 28 feature Drizzt and and maybe a dozen feature Elminster. That's 12.5%. Literally 87.5% of the Realms has nothing to do with those characters.

And that's just the novels. Probably 99.9% of the supplements has nothing to do with those characters.

 

[Jester David]

Let's pretend you rip out all the areas of the map touched by Drizzt and Elminster. What's left:

Still a heck of a lot. Several regions the size of Russia. Large swaths of territory. Which is the strength of the Realms, there's always more room and places to expand and make your own. You can hate large sections of it, but there's always a place you can find interesting or make interesting.

 

[Prism]

In FR, on the other hand, it always felt like the similar story would be, "And here's Elminster, staving off the invoked devastation caused by powerful NPC, except he is betrayed by Drizzt, who was controlled by other powerful NPC, which caused this place to be wiped off the map. Your adventure is to go and much about and learn about the cool things they did.

Ah don't worry about those guys..

Drizzt is portrayed as a mid/high level fighter not a world beater. He fights orcs, ogres and giants. He struggles against high level drow and actively avoids big stuff like dragons. His area is a small section of the north. He won't be coming to save the day any day soon.

Elminster is more powerful but as a chosen of Mystra is basically not interested in anything that doesn't involve damage to the magical weave or something that threatens Cormyr.

Most written worlds have a bunch of powerful characters written into the scenery but the worlds are big enough to cope without them being involved. Athas has got its Dragon Kings, Greyhawk has the circle of eight and the characters from the Gord books

 

[MG.0]

I started with Greyhawk and always preferred it. The Forgotten Realms always seemed less 'real' to me, but I could never put my finger on why exactly. I'd like to write it off as just an artifact of Greyhawk being my first campaign world, but I think there's more to it. Not sure what it is though. Don't get me wrong, I play games set in the Realms. My current campaign is set there. Still, I've always felt like something is missing. I've read novels set in both worlds and I do prefer the Greyhawk Gord the Rogue novels to any of the FR novels I've read, but again I can't say why, exactly.

I also enjoy Dragonlance, Dark Sun, and Spelljammer. I was never a fan of Planescape (although I love the planes themselves). I've never really played in Mystara and know little about it. I never played 3rd or 4th edition so have had limited contact with any stuff from that era (except I've read significant amounts about the planes of existence in both 3rd and 4th...enough to know I don't like how they were handled). What I've heard of Eberron makes me think I would not like it.

 

[Remathilis]

I have been running my first 5e campaign after an absence from D&D, and, for the most part, is has been enjoyable. I've adjusted the materials (so far, we are about to complete Phandelver) so that it is set in Greyhawk- boxed set, circa 1983 (more open ended).

Anyway, on the one hand, I appreciate that the core books of 5e have nods to the various campaign settings within them. On the other hand... Forgotten Realms ("FR") is the default? I was hoping that I could get a little input from the knowledgeable people here.

Forgotten Realms isn't the default, its the example. Whenever the core-books needed an example, they used FR (mostly, the example Pantheon in the DMG is the Nentir Vale one, but I digress). The modules are set in FR as part of their Adventure League strategy, and the games are set there because it makes it easy for the designers to use the established lore (and the most successful D&D video games of the past 20 years have been FR: Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, Neverwinter MMO, etc. Only Strormreach [Eberron] and Temple of Elemental Evil [Greyhawk, and a POS to boot] broke the trend).

1. Why was FR chosen as the default? I understand that 5e had a lot of feedback, so is this the most popular campaign setting in general?

Not popular, but well known. It has had several successful video games, novels, comics, and such. It has a huge library of resources and lore. And above all, it doesn't outright contradict the "classic" D&D lore they way say Dragonlance or Eberron does. IMHO, there are three "generic" D&D worlds: Greyhawk, Mystara, and Forgotten Realms. Greyhawk comes in two flavors: Gygaxian (lightly described, basically blank slate) or Post Gygaxian (with its own metaplots and Mary Sue NPCs) and Mystara hasn't been produced in 20 years (and is rooted heavily in Basic D&D assumptions). Forgotten Realms starts looking like the no-brainer in this situation.

2. This is more of a question, perhaps, to enlighten me- why do I hate FR so much? I love different campaign settings. Spelljammer and Planescape to connect them, home-brew, Greyhawk, Eberron, Krynn, Al-Qadim/Kara-Tur (yes, I know that they may be considered "part" of FR, but they are standalone), and so on. But ever since FR came out, I disliked everything about it. I hated Elminster. I hated the mythos and the world. I hated, hated, hated Drizzt.

Perception is colored by experience. Your first experience was with Greyhawk, so its the basis you compare it to.

So why? Okay, I know why I hated Elminster (stand in for Greenwood) and Drizzt (that's just a terrible, terrible character). But what about the campaign world? Should I go back and give it a second chance? I'm genuinely curious- I honestly don't remember why I disliked it so intensely, which is odd, and it looks like there will be a lot of material coming down the pipeline. Thoughts?

I find it funny you hate Elminster for being Greenwood's avatar, because that is EXACTLY what I do with Mordenkainen, Tenser, Rolibar, Rary, all all the rest of the Circle of the Eight/Former PCs of Gary's. Don't get my started on Zygag.

As for giving it another chance, here is what I suggest. Wait until November and read the Sword Coast Adv Guide. At the very least, you're getting some new crunch ideas that need a bit of name adjustment. Then, read the fluff. If its to your liking, then decide if you would be interested in doing more. If its not, steal a few good ideas and toss the rest. Go in with an open mind, but if it doesn't appeal then no harm done. You at least got a few subraces and subclasses for the deal.