What would you like to see happen with FR?

[Janaxstrus]

Come, now; All I want is a mixture of setting materials, not the setting-hegemony we've seen for the last year or so.

[As an aside, sentient golem != robot, and while Eberron material was being published regularly, there /wasn't/ a dearth of FR material, FWIW.]

the second definition of Golem is An Automaton or Robot...so...yah.

Here's my point on the FR thing. If suddenly they removed Warforged, or changed them to being Cyborgs instead of robots, and then act like they've always been that way (ie suddenly elves are "eladrin") or suddenly level 20 people cropped up all over, Eberron fans would have a fit.

It's not what they came to love about Eberron. Well, for me, a gritty world where 3/4ths of the NPCs/Characters I liked are dead is not the high fantasy full of magic Realms I loved.

 

[Darwinism]

FR needs to be retired. The only redeeming feature in so long was the Spellplague.

The Realms had way, way too many high-level characters. More than a few are Ed Greenwood's fault, the guy is way, way too prone to inserting pervy characters, many of them self-inserts, into the fiction. And, hell, I can't think of a single FR campaign I've played in that didn't, at some point, have Elminster or Khelben or Manshoon or any of the other few dozen 20+ characters showing up just because they make for such an enticing railroad. Remarkably few DMs even see it as railroading to toss Elminster into a game because so many people who actually take the fiction seriously are in love with that particular Mary Sue.

Also why, why in the name of god is Forgotten Realms, one of the most boringly generic worlds imaginable, spoken of as 'high fantasy'? There's nearly nothing about it that's at all fantastical; it's derivative, unimaginative, and about as non-fantastic as you can get while still labeling it as fantasy. Fantasy is not the norm of reclusive elves in forests, reclusive dwarves under mountains, orc hordes threatening civilization, and so on. Those have been stock fantasy since 1937. The entire point of the word fantasy is being fantastical; being standard is not high fantasy.

Oh and what really gets me is the complaining about the Spellplague is almost word-for-word what was said when the ToT was rolled out to explain that edition shift.

 

[Janaxstrus]

FR needs to be retired. The only redeeming feature in so long was the Spellplague.

The Realms had way, way too many high-level characters. More than a few are Ed Greenwood's fault, the guy is way, way too prone to inserting pervy characters, many of them self-inserts, into the fiction. And, hell, I can't think of a single FR campaign I've played in that didn't, at some point, have Elminster or Khelben or Manshoon or any of the other few dozen 20+ characters showing up just because they make for such an enticing railroad. Remarkably few DMs even see it as railroading to toss Elminster into a game because so many people who actually take the fiction seriously are in love with that particular Mary Sue.

Also why, why in the name of god is Forgotten Realms, one of the most boringly generic worlds imaginable, spoken of as 'high fantasy'? There's nearly nothing about it that's at all fantastical; it's derivative, unimaginative, and about as non-fantastic as you can get while still labeling it as fantasy. Fantasy is not the norm of reclusive elves in forests, reclusive dwarves under mountains, orc hordes threatening civilization, and so on. Those have been stock fantasy since 1937. The entire point of the word fantasy is being fantastical; being standard is not high fantasy.

Oh and what really gets me is the complaining about the Spellplague is almost word-for-word what was said when the ToT was rolled out to explain that edition shift.

High fantasy is defined in a way that the Realms are pure high fantasy. Just because your own personal definition doesn't match what it actually means, doesn't change the real meaning.

 

[Darwinism]

High fantasy is defined in a way that the Realms are pure high fantasy. Just because your own personal definition doesn't match what it actually means, doesn't change the real meaning.

FR does fit 'high fantasy' as a genre, it's just completely unoriginal and a symptom of the word fantasy becoming devalued from indicative of the fantastical to simply comfortable cliches that have been repeated nearly verbatim since Tolkien.

 

[Mercule]

First choice: Give it all the love Greyhawk gets. Maybe slightly less. And, despite being a huge Greyhawk fan, I think it got exactly the right amount of attention in 4e. Sometimes, it's just time to move on.

Second choice: Actually, I don't have a second choice. I've wanted it dead since the gray box. Setting aside personal feelings, though, I really do think the Spell Plague puts the setting in the same bucket as Greyhawk (From the Ashes). The Greyhawk fan base is too split. Do you like the gold & red box, From the Ashes, or some other incarnation? It can't be reconciled. FR is now in the same place. It'll probably limp along through 5e, like Greyhawk did in 3e.

Hopefully, they don't screw up Eberron. I think that's got at least one more edition in it. Maybe in another five years, they can crowdsource a new setting -- or do another contest.

 

[Yora]

First choice: Give it all the love Greyhawk gets.

None?

I think Forgotten Realms is not a bad setting. But I think it has kind of reached a state of completion. Like 10 years ago. Either yu reprint the same stuff over and over again, or you add new stuff just for the sake of adding new stuff.
Selling the 2nd and 3rd Edition books as pdfs again is all that is really needed to please the fans of the setting. But if it's complete, don't expand on it just to generate income. New settings are better candidates for that.

 

[Lwaxy]

Yeah seeing how we still play 3.5/PF in Greyhawk, nothing stops anyone from playing in Faerun, support or not. But I have a feeling FR will still be "supported."

 

[Yora]

As long as people buy it.

And really: If you don't like it, don't buy it. Those who buy it probably like it. There's really no harm in producing them.

 

[jbear]

I've been wondering, after the mess with the spellplague (which my groups treats as non-existent) what would you like to see done for the Realms?

I find it interesting that "Keep the Spellplague and FR as it is" doesn't make it into the options list. Not that I would ever support the notion that others can't play the way they like in the setting they like (which does appear as an option with the wipe of the Spellplague).

I do what I like with the FR. In my home campaign I blended it with Ravenloft for example. I do that whenever I use a campaign world. It is merely bones. I always flesh it out my way to suit the game I want to run.

I'm not sure if I am a lone voice in the wilderness, but I don't consider that there was any "mess" with the spellplague. I found the spellplague a wonderful inspiration for my campaign. I found the FR Campaign guide (4e) a rich source of story lines and plot hooks.
I'm not even sure what is supposedly to be missed about the pre-spellplague area.

Perhaps I didn't know it in enough depth. However, I honestly can't recall anything particularly interesting about the earlier FRealm's. I don't mean that as a slight to anyone who does recall and can define what they liked so much about pre-4e FR. All I mean is that I personally would be unable to define what made it more special than 4e FR.

To me FR was Drizzt and Gwuenhyvar, the Underdark, mindflayers and snirfeblin with a dash of Utgard Barbarian. It was Baldur's Gate and a bald man and his weasle Boo. It was Waterdeep and the Undermountain. Cormyr, the dragonwall and the horse nomads.

With 4e did I lose any of that? Well ... not really. I didn't feel the need or desire to include Drizzt in my campaign. The Underdark was there, only closer then ever with a massive collapse exposing large parts of it to the surface. WHich covers mindflayers and snirfeblin as far as I was concerned.

As much as I like Minsc and Boo, Baldur's Gate was cool because it was a cool video game. I didn't force it into my campaign. But it was there ... sure ... with more refugees but there.

Waterdeep ... undermountain ... still there ... Cormyr, Tuigans ... all there ...

And add the fact that a whole chunk of the actual lost Realm has returned and collided with the world! Wicked! Now the Forgotten Realm is actually relevant!

Primordials gathering forces to over throw the gods ... insane churches who go on pilgrimages to spellplagued areas and receive spiritual guidance fromt eh Sharn! Sweet! The Society of Aboleths from the Far Realm doing who knows what for who knows why! Netheril making economic inroads into Cormyr, slowly gathering strength with their floating cities ... Cyric imprisoned by the gods for murdering Mystra .... His church infiltrating the Zhents ...

From where I stand (and I'm only mention stuff I can literally recall from the very top of my head), that is a whole lot of cool flavour to use as inspiration for any campaign.

I know everyone has different opinions. I just think it should be said that some people (or at least me) liked the destruction of the Realms. But I don't hold it against those that don't/didn't.

That said, if 5e goes back to reset I can't see myself being interested in using it as a base setting. I'll stick with what I've got.

 

[Herschel]

And I would really love for them not to ruin it this time. If they do, I'll just ignore the updates, of course, but still...

Maybe if your premise wasn't edition warring it would be different. Simply put, The Realms will go on, my guess is there may actually be a new god of magic ascend, it may even be an evil one this time like Shar or Lolth to really shake things up.

If you like The Realms in the past, run your game in the past. It's that simple.