D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

billd91 said:

For those lamenting the FR-ness of the current edition of D&D - what's an alternative that's going to make sense from WotC's perspective of needing to make money with their publications? Certainly not supporting a plethora of alternative campaign settings. That's part of what helped burn TSR. More generic alternatives may work, but adventures work best and read better (as far as I'm concerned) if they're fit within a context already. And from WotC's perspective, I'll bet they're more fun to write if they're written within a particular setting context as well. Plus, I figure that setting-based adventures and setting materials encourage sales of each other.

So if you don't like FR-focused adventures, I suggest you resign yourself to get used to them unless WotC decides to shift completely to another setting (and then Iuz help you if you don't like that setting either).

Click to expand...

Again, the topic of the thread was why many "hate" the Forgotten Realms. It was not anything else. Your advice is a bit off topic. I don't really think anyone here thought this thread would change the D&D marketing approach.

There's also the option of checking the DM's Guild for adventures. I haven't looked, but I understand that one of the purposes is people posting adventure modules that you can buy. Hopefully some non-FR setting modules will be posted, or ones that don't involve a lot of realms lore.

I love FR.

Demetrios1453 said:

Consider the question asked then.

At which point do you think a campaign is no longer using the Forgotten Realms?

Click to expand...

Having never played a Realms game...

I'd say when the vast majority of the NPCs and organizations do not exist or are drastically changed from their original state. This includes Gods and Churches, Thieves Guilds and Armies, Cults and Sages.

If I talk to a DM and he has no idea who the Harpers or the Zhentarim are, and declares they do not exist, it is not FR, because those two groups are massive forces in the world from what I understand. (I know the Zhents because I watch Acquisitions Incorporated).

billd91 said:

Which at least means the publisher has stopped putting out contradictory information or changing things with every edition...

Click to expand...

Which helps us new players how? Other than trolling online stores for PDF copies of things that might still exist... how are we supposed to use these settings? Just declare "This is Greyhawk" and run an adventure set in England? And sure, PDFs are nice, very portable, but then we have to convert a lot of material and hope we purchase the right product that gives us the information we need.

billd91 said:

For those lamenting the FR-ness of the current edition of D&D - what's an alternative that's going to make sense from WotC's perspective of needing to make money with their publications? Certainly not supporting a plethora of alternative campaign settings. That's part of what helped burn TSR. More generic alternatives may work, but adventures work best and read better (as far as I'm concerned) if they're fit within a context already. And from WotC's perspective, I'll bet they're more fun to write if they're written within a particular setting context as well. Plus, I figure that setting-based adventures and setting materials encourage sales of each other.

So if you don't like FR-focused adventures, I suggest you resign yourself to get used to them unless WotC decides to shift completely to another setting (and then Iuz help you if you don't like that setting either).

Click to expand...

How much support is really needed though to give people options?

Two books. Give people the Sword Coast Adventurers guide for Eberron and Dark Sun, and now we have three vastly different game worlds to play in. Then, further down the line, maybe an adventure takes place in Eberron, with a blurb about how to use it in FR if people want. Then, a year or so later, set an adventure in Dark Sun, with a blurb about how to use it in FR.

We then have 3 fairly equally supported worlds, and "the default setting is the DnD multiverse" is actually a supported statement.

I get that such a decision would mean stopping support for FR for the next few years, but that shouldn't kill the game. Even give us one additional setting, and there will at least be something else to choose from. And I don't think it will be a serious financial bomb, I think such a product would actually do very well, because there is a craving for new things.

Chaosmancer said:

I get that such a decision would mean stopping support for FR for the next few years, but that shouldn't kill the game. Even give us one additional setting, and there will at least be something else to choose from. And I don't think it will be a serious financial bomb, I think such a product would actually do very well, because there is a craving for new things.

Click to expand...

Sure. Let's assume it wouldn't be a financial bomb. But the question is: Will it make the company as much/more $ as the current plan?
Evidently WoTC doesn't think so....

Mercule said:

I tried to adapt PotA to Eberron, and the overland map actually provided many subtle difficulties to the conversion -- and that's probably the easiest of the adventures to adapt.

Click to expand...

Er...please forgive what may sound like a dumb question, but how can a map with the scope of what's in PotA possibly provide any difficulties in conversion from anything to anything?

Lanefan

Lanefan said:

Er...please forgive what may sound like a dumb question, but how can a map with the scope of what's in PotA possibly provide any difficulties in conversion from anything to anything?

Lanefan

Click to expand...

At a guess, I'd say that the geography, particularly all the proper names of, would be tricky. Finding an area that is similar enough geographically to fit with the coastal region, where there are so many settlements and whatnot might be a bit of a tough fit. Imagine trying to stick that module into Greyhawk for example - you need a coastal region where you have a large city and a number of smaller towns and villages sitting relatively close to humanoid settlements. I can see that being a problem.

Chaosmancer said:

Which helps us new players how? Other than trolling online stores for PDF copies of things that might still exist... how are we supposed to use these settings?

Click to expand...

If you're ever at a major convention (e.g. GenCon) you'll be able to find all kinds of out-of-print hardcopy material* if you dig, some relatively cheaply, some at a (sometimes serious) price - but the expensive stuff can usually be ignored.

Or, there's ebay...which I don't personally recommend, but it is an option.

Or, do you have a FLGS in your area and if so, does it have a used section or consignment section?

* - even more so if you don't care about how pristine of condition it's in.

Two books. Give people the Sword Coast Adventurers guide for Eberron and Dark Sun, and now we have three vastly different game worlds to play in. Then, further down the line, maybe an adventure takes place in Eberron, with a blurb about how to use it in FR if people want. Then, a year or so later, set an adventure in Dark Sun, with a blurb about how to use it in FR.

We then have 3 fairly equally supported worlds, and "the default setting is the DnD multiverse" is actually a supported statement.

I get that such a decision would mean stopping support for FR for the next few years, but that shouldn't kill the game. Even give us one additional setting, and there will at least be something else to choose from. And I don't think it will be a serious financial bomb, I think such a product would actually do very well, because there is a craving for new things.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...not sure if you'd be in the majority here or not.

Eberron and Dark Sun, for all they might have going for them, are undeniably niche settings - as are Planescape, Spelljammer, Ravenloft, and some others. And niche settings have a big built-in strike against them: the potential market, and thus potential profit, for each is much smaller than for any generic setting.

The generic-ish settings other than FR are Greyhawk, Mystara/Hollow World, Nentir Vale...and possibly Birthright if done properly. And with these you have a strong point: they really should do an Adventurers' Guide for a couple of those (I'd say Mystara and Nentir Vale, just for kicks) and see how it goes.

Lan-"or they could surprise us all and come up with an entirely new generic setting, only this one would be baggage-free"-efan

Hussar said:

At a guess, I'd say that the geography, particularly all the proper names of, would be tricky. Finding an area that is similar enough geographically to fit with the coastal region, where there are so many settlements and whatnot might be a bit of a tough fit. Imagine trying to stick that module into Greyhawk for example - you need a coastal region where you have a large city and a number of smaller towns and villages sitting relatively close to humanoid settlements. I can see that being a problem.

Click to expand...

What coast? What large city? PotA takes place entirely within a relatively small part of the Dessarin valley, so you would only need to find an isolated and relatively lightly-settled river valley to port it to another setting. The adventure never gets near the coast, and Waterdeep is only mentioned in the distant background - some of the NPCs early on are from there, but that's about the totality of Waterdeep's involvement with the plot, so any "relatively distant large city" in whatever setting you're using would suffice...

OotA would similarly be relatively easy to port as well, as it's pretty much all underground and wouldn't conflict much with any surface geography. I do have to admit that SKT would be quite a bit more difficult, if only for the more sandboxy sections before going to the Oracle and while raiding the burial mounds. The upcoming ToA would seem to be again on the easier side, since many settings already have "isolated and relatively unknown jungle region" built into them...

Hussar said:

At a guess, I'd say that the geography, particularly all the proper names of, would be tricky. Finding an area that is similar enough geographically to fit with the coastal region, where there are so many settlements and whatnot might be a bit of a tough fit. Imagine trying to stick that module into Greyhawk for example - you need a coastal region where you have a large city and a number of smaller towns and villages sitting relatively close to humanoid settlements. I can see that being a problem.

Click to expand...

I've got PotA in front of me, and the main map (page 32) just shows the Dessarin Valley - no coast anywhere in sight - and covers maybe 250 x 350 miles; which is roughly the same or maybe a little bigger than the regional map given in B-10 Night's Dark Terror.

And it can always be tweaked to suit if the prepackaged geography of the main setting doesn't have an exact fit, as long as the travel times between adventure sites remain mostly about the same - if such things are even relevant at all.

Each time I've run B-10 all I've done is taken out a chunk of my setting map and replaced it with (more or less) what's in B-10. It's not that difficult. Were I to run all of PotA (so far all I've done is poached it for stand-alones) I probably wouldn't even do that much, but instead just drop the adventure sites into places that suited their themes.

Lanefan

EDIT: trumped by [MENTION=6801060]Demetrios1453[/MENTION]