D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

Mercule · Jun 6, 2017

Caliban said:
You think 'If you don't like the FR setting, don't use it and make up your own stuff" is the same as "suck it up and learn to live the Realms"?

You are not being rational, so I'm done with you. Good day.

Actually, I'd say you're the one being irrational or, at least, (intentionally?) sidestepping the actual conversation.

Here's the issue: I want published adventures/paths that are not set in the Realms or so mildly Realms-flavored to be nearly irrelevant. That has two components:
1) I want to use published adventures/paths
2) I do not want to use the Realms

I objected to people being smug about anyone who wanted to use published adventures (i.e. didn't want to make their own) just needing to deal with it and using the Realms.

Your comment was that if I didn't want to use the Realms, I should just roll my own adventures. That is technically not the exact same thing. But, it's the exact same smugness on the other side of the coin.

Caliban said:
If that doesn't work for you, I'm somewhat sympathetic, but it doesn't sound like using FR modules is satisfying you either.

Which is the point you've either been missing or not actually "somewhat sympathetic" about for quite some time.

Lanefan · Jun 6, 2017

Davelozzi said:
Based on everything that I have heard about the 4e Realms and how well it went over, I would think this would be a gigantic mistake. This thread title aside, the Realms is the most popular campaign setting. Fans are cool with it evolving, but a major reset that totally changes what the Realms are is probably going to turn off way more people than it turns on. Even if it was an improvement, how many of the haters are really going to give it a chance?

I didn't read what [MENTION=6871653]vincegetorix[/MENTION] posted as looking for a reset. It seemed more like a complete reboot from scratch, and if approached from that perspective (i.e. wipe out ALL the history and lore and baggage and start right over from square one) he-she might be on to something.

Lan-"except the reboot idea is missing Norse, and by holy law you can't have a D&D setting without Norse in it somewhere"-efan

Mercule · Jun 6, 2017

double post

Erm...

Long live Eberron!

Caliban · Jun 6, 2017

Mercule said:
Actually, I'd say you're the one being irrational or, at least, (intentionally?) sidestepping the actual conversation.

I was never part of the conversation you are talking about.

Your comment was that if I didn't want to use the Realms, I should just roll my own adventures. That is technically not the exact same thing. But, it's the exact same smugness on the other side of the coin.

That comment wasn't directed at you, as I've already told you. Pretending that I was talking directly to you when I was talking to someone else is not rational.

Which is the point you've either been missing or not actually "somewhat sympathetic" about for quite some time.

You seem to think I was talking to you in that post, despite the fact that I was responding to someone else, and me telling you point blank that my answer wouldn't apply to you.

Hence, I conclude you still aren't being rational. Please stop replying to my posts.

MechaPilot · Jun 6, 2017

Caliban said:
You also seem opposed to looking for any other source of adventures to use,. . .

Nope. I'm not opposed to looking elsewhere. I can, have, and do peruse the GM's guild for adventures. There's a lot there. Frankly, some of it requires even more conversion work than WotC's published adventures. Others don't. And, there's a wide range of quality (and lack thereof) on the DMsG, whereas WotC generally has a fairly consistent level of quality in it's adventures.

My biggest turn-off as far as the DMsG goes is that I prefer to have physical books, preferably hardcover (but softcover's not a deal-breaker).

Caliban said:
. . . unless someone presents them to you so you don't have to do any work at all. (Since that is exactly what you told me to do.)

I'm not expecting others to do the work for me (without being compensated for creating an adventure, that is). I was merely illustrating that your "problem solved" response was incorrect, because the problem of finding an adventure to adapt for my use remains unsolved by simply saying "I'm not going to use an FR adventure."

Caliban said:
For me, coming up with my own stuff from scratch is faster and more satisfying than adapting a someone else's module to suit my needs. If that doesn't work for you, I'm somewhat sympathetic, but it doesn't sound like using FR modules is satisfying you either.

I get more satisfaction out of creating my own stuff as well, despite it taking more time than adapting an existing adventure. If everything worked out so we could all get the maximum level of satisfaction out of life, that would be wonderful. But, life just doesn't work that way.

Tales and Chronicles · Jun 6, 2017

Lanefan said:
I didn't read what @vincegetorix posted as looking for a reset. It seemed more like a complete reboot from scratch, and if approached from that perspective (i.e. wipe out ALL the history and lore and baggage and start right over from square one) he-she might be on to something.

Lan-"except the reboot idea is missing Norse, and by holy law you can't have a D&D setting without Norse in it somewhere"-efan

I've had difficulties inserting stereotyped norse/viking culture in a late medieval/renaissance setting. I dont know enough about this periode in scandinavia to make something for them. IIRC, in the first edition of The 7th Sea, they divided the Vendel (the norse equivalent of the setting) into two faction: the ones who embraced the new ways of things and use their incredible skill of navigation and their mastery of river-boating to create a merchant league, and the more other ones who still revered the old gods and traditions (viking-style).

Now I want to create this document.

Caliban · Jun 6, 2017

MechaPilot said:
I get more satisfaction out of creating my own stuff as well, despite it taking more time than adapting an existing adventure. If everything worked out so we could all get the maximum level of satisfaction out of life, that would be wonderful. But, life just doesn't work that way.

That's the part that I have trouble getting my head around - for me, creating my own adventures is faster than adapting a pre-written adventure. Especially in 5e (3e stat blocks used to take me forever). That is why my initial response was "Don't use the FR setting and create your own adventures" - that was exactly the solution I used when I became unsatisfied with the Forgotten Realms. (I don't dislike the setting, I just feel like I've outgrown it.)

I accept that it may not be the case for you or other people, so adapting an FR module may be the "least unacceptable" option for your situation. It just seems like it's not really a good solution if you are complaining about having to use them.

Mercule · Jun 6, 2017

Caliban said:
That comment wasn't directed at you, as I've already told you. Pretending that I was talking directly to you when I was talking to someone else is not rational.

You seem to think I was talking to you in that post, despite the fact that I was responding to someone else, and me telling you point blank that my answer wouldn't apply to you.

It may have been directed specifically at MechaPilot, but he and I were asking for pretty much the same thing. You could have just as easily been one of my posts that you quoted, but it happened to be one of his.

It's a public conversation. When you get flip with someone in a public conversation and make non-arguments, people who agree with them are going to call you on it. That's the nature of public conversations. It's irrational to believe otherwise. Trying to deflect with "I wasn't talking to you" doesn't help.

I think MechaPilot summed up the root problem, thus: "He's not the only one who took it that way. Maybe the tone you wished to convey somehow got lost in the wording of your response."

So, to bring this back to the original topic, I'll say something plainly. It's not aimed at you. You can decide on your own whether or not the shoe fits.

-----

I realized, partway through this thread, one of the reasons people have come to hate the Realms is that, in addition to their primacy/monopoly in 5E, there are a good number of folks -- most, but not all, fans -- that respond to anyone who is dissatisfied with the current product offerings and this Realms-primacy with some variation of "Suck it up and learn to like the Realms," "You aren't the target audience," "The Realms make them money," "Then don't use them," and so forth.

Staffan · Jun 6, 2017

vincegetorix said:
I dont really mind the FR, but I'd like if WotC design team would just make a huge step forward in time and wipe most of the map, keeping only a few major settlement gathered in kingdoms/alliance/whatever with generic themes that new players and Dm can easily understand.

With due respect, that would be a horrible idea, as evidenced by how 4e Forgotten Realms was received.

Rebooting an active setting is almost never a good idea. Doing so will turn off those who like the setting as-is, and probably won't attract those who dislike the setting because they will still dislike it on principle. Your kingdoms don't sound like bad ideas per se, but would be better served by placing them in a new world instead of changing the Realms.

It can sometimes work when relaunching an inactive property, but there it has to be done with care so you maintain the things the old fans liked about the world. For example, in the current relaunch of the TORG RPG they have the same cosms invading, but have changed the location of one from Indonesia to India, and had some alterations done to the others because now it's 2017 and not 1990, and the zeitgeist is quite different.

Tales and Chronicles · Jun 6, 2017

Staffan said:
With due respect, that would be a horrible idea, as evidenced by how 4e Forgotten Realms was received.

I agree, this is something I would personaly like, but this is because I dont really like the Realms like their are, mainly because the setting seems stuck in his own. Most real fans dislike any attempt to move the setting foward, because that would mean changes to the things they like as they are. Maybe if those changes were not provoked by a huge cataclysm but only by the passage of time it would be better received, I dont know. Let Elminster, Drizzt, the Time of Trouble, the Spellplague and all that become legends from another time like we have King Arthur and Robin Hood IRL.

They can also just let the Realms be the Realms. Many people love it and I like when people have fun with D&D, no matter the setting they use.

D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

Mercule

Adventurer

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

Mercule

Adventurer

Caliban

Rules Monkey

MechaPilot

Explorer

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix

Caliban

Rules Monkey

Mercule

Adventurer

Staffan

Legend

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix

Similar Threads