D&D 5E Forgotton Realms Canon?

[The Hitcher]

I really like their approach. They're leaving things really open, so that individuals can play in whatever version of the world they wish. If you're waiting for a big info-dump that fills in the official version, I think you'll be disappointed. Just go with whatever makes sense for you.

 

[Nivenus]

I really like their approach. They're leaving things really open, so that individuals can play in whatever version of the world they wish. If you're waiting for a big info-dump that fills in the official version, I think you'll be disappointed. Just go with whatever makes sense for you.

Well here's where you reach the central contradiction within the FR fandom (and I say this as an FR fan): most FR fans love having a ton of information to read and incorporate into their campaign, but they're also highly sensitive to any unwanted changes to the material they already know and love. Hence the outrage at 4e (which did make a number of bizarre and unneeded changes) and the simultaneous disappointment at not having a setting book yet for 5e.

To be fair, this is hardly unique to FR fans.

 

[The Hitcher]

Well here's where you reach the central contradiction within the FR fandom (and I say this as an FR fan): most FR fans love having a ton of information to read and incorporate into their campaign, but they're also highly sensitive to any unwanted changes to the material they already know and love. Hence the outrage at 4e (which did make a number of bizarre and unneeded changes) and the simultaneous disappointment at not having a setting book yet for 5e.

To be fair, this is hardly unique to FR fans.

Perhaps, but I reckon they're betting on the majority of D&D fans being happier not being buried under a ton of lore. And I reckon it's a good bet. Personally, my enjoyment playing in an established setting is in inverse proportion to the quantity of lore I feel obliged to consume.

All of what I'm saying, by the way, is based on what Ed Greenwood and others have been saying lately. Check out the FR panels from Gencon via the Tome Show.

 

[HobbitFan]

There are a few problems with the low-key route they are taking with the Realms right now:

1. New fans aren't being given anything interesting to draw them to the Realms. And
2. Established fans went through the much-hyped Sundering which promised (in PR anyway) to be a big event and to fix the 4E problems with the Realms but turned out to be largely flash in the pan. Most fans don't know what happened in the Sundering or what changes have occured.

For both groups, a point remains to consider. If WOTC is going to give out such little info that DMs have to make almost everything up anyway...why play the Realms? Why not just homebrew?

I'm not sure that doing nothing, as they are doing now, counts as doing anything at all.
Unless they actually do something with the Realms they aren't going to win over any new fans nor bring any lapsed fans back.

 

[The Hitcher]

My take is that they're not trying to please (or recruit) Realms fans, they're trying to recruit D&D fans. They're setting the Realms up as the default, generic setting. Why use it instead of something even more generic? Because it does have some brand recognition, and because there's enough there for them to build their big adventure arcs on. But it's those arcs they want people to care about - the minute-to-minute experience of taking part in an epic story - not a whole bunch of dry background lore that doesn't involve them being the hero.

IMO the Realms is kind of a goofy setting when looked at through a macro lens, but it comes alive in the excitement of a specific adventure. I don't consider myself a Realms fan at all, and yet I'm loving the 5E modules (and I even enjoyed the Salvatore short stories I listened to recently). I think they've made just the right call on this.

 

[Bumamgar]

I do think it would be nice if they provided a one-pager outlining the results of the Sundering in broad strokes. Confirmation on which gods are now alive or dead and what their portfolios and relationships are. A general overview of the current geography now that Abeir and Toril have split. High level stuff, not a lot of detail required but just enough so folks have a sense of the lay of the land.

I suspect, however, that one reason they are keeping it vague is simply to allow existing Realms fans to do their own cherry picking. You liked Velsharoon? Great! Bring him back post-Sundering. You don't? Great! He's still dead! In some ways it's nice to be able to have that kind of freedom, but I think for many of us its quite a shift away from how the Realms have been treated over the years and we're a bit gun shy about it, since we all expect a novel or campaign guide to come out at some point that contradicts whatever decisions we've made, thus forcing us to either not use that resource, retcon our campaigns or do a bit of work to modify the resource to conform to 'our Realms'.

 

[The Hitcher]

I suspect, however, that one reason they are keeping it vague is simply to allow existing Realms fans to do their own cherry picking.

You don't have to suspect - they've straight-out said as much. That intent has been carried into the novels, where they're leaving a lot of stuff covered by a "fog of war". And unless they suddenly change their philosophy, it's going to stay that way. Ed has talked about how this actually reflects the setting - communication is far from perfect in the Realms, so various versions of a given story will be possible. And this is desirable in the game, because it opens up the possibility space for individual games.

If something does come along in a novel that contradicts your game, you have two options:

1. Say that it didn't happen like that in your version of the world (though potentially it's a story being told there).

2. Say that it did happen like that, and anything you've previously said that contradicts it was misreported.

These are especially easy when it comes to the doings of the gods and other powerful beings, as they will rarely be in play in a direct way.

Of course, if something happened directly to your PCs, then it should be the truth. Your game is a story where they are the heroes, after all. Even in the more lore-heavy Realms of the past, it has been very possible for the players to change the world in ways not reflected in the 'canon'. In fact it was probably a lot easier, unless the DM decided to impose heavy-handed restraints.

Ultimately, this is an RPG. The story should be about the experiences of the player characters. The lore should be whatever it needs to be to support that.

 

[HobbitFan]

I understand what you are saying Hitcher. They want players to experience the Realms the way the first Dragonlance fans did...by playing games in the setting. I get that.

If that was always going to be the model though, why did they do the Sundering and hype it the way they did? Because they totally marketed it as "we're fixing things to be back the way you like so you can come back and play."

There's a disconnect between the Sundering messaging and what they are saying now.

 

[shadow]

So, if they're bringing back Bhaal and Mykrul and getting rid of the 'returned Abeir', does that mean that they are hitting the reset switch?

 

[HobbitFan]

Shadow: The general consensus online is that it's like a "soft" reboot. They are rolling back some of the most horrible crud from 4E Realms but they aren't wiping out any history. Everything still happened from 1st ed Realms on and the timeline still advances past 4E. So basically, advance timeline about 10 years and remake the 4E realms to be more like 1-2nd edition realms. That's the impression I get from author interviews and such I've read online.