New Forgotten Realms designed by FR haters?

[jdrakeh]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I have an observation (which doesn't deal with self-selection, which is its own horrendous problem with internet surveys/reviews).

In order to add together those different sources, one must show that each person within them are unique (that is the same person didn't post a negative review in each area) and that if there are non-uniques, they are only counted once.

That's an astute observation, of course, but the current matter isn't even that complicated. The fact is that 12 complaintants, 100 complaintants, 1,000 complaintants, or even 10,000 complaintants doesn't come close to comprising a majority of D&D players.

So far, I've seen proof of a few dozen complaintants at most (and that's being pretty generous). Is that a majority of D&D players? I don't think so. I mean, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that more than a few dozen people are playing D&D worldwide.

 

[Piratecat]

When I read these boards, I think I must be the only person in the world who thought the Times of Trouble were cool.

Yeah, pretty much.

 

[Phaezen]

When I read these boards, I think I must be the only person in the world who thought the Times of Trouble were cool.

Yeah, pretty much.

I actualy quite liked the concept, so there are two of us. YThe rest of you are a minority

 

[Primal]

This took around ten seconds to find. There were plenty of upset people regarding the 4e changes inserted into GHotR when it was released, that thread being just one example. Maybe you missed it all the first time around, but you may have just not been looking, because there was plenty here and a firestorm over on WotC and Candlekeep.

I completely agree. I also remember seeing a huge backlash directed at the design team over on the WoTC and Candlekeep forums for those pages in GHoTR. I personally hated stuff back then, and I still hate it today. Yet I happily dished out 35 euros for GHoTR, even though the art is recycled and the last pages are just ****; not only did I want to support Brian's marvelous work, but I've also got a lot of use out of the book.

 

[Primal]

I love my Grey Box because it's a bare-bones kind of setting that only briefly touches on many aspects of the Realms and leaves the rest up to my own imagination. My Grey Box isn't the massive, encyclopedic, collection of NPCs and incredibly detailed information on every known aspect of life in the Realms that you describe it as. My Grey Box must be from an alternate Earth.

No, it is not a "massive collection of NPCs" but it has a variety of NPCs from different "walks of life", with well-written backgrounds. It also has basic info on adventuring companies and merchant companies and deities, books and spells and poisons unique to the realms, several keyed village/town/city maps, rumours from all over the Realms, two adventures, consensus of the whole population of Shadowdale, and "bare-bones" descriptions of many, many settlements. I don't think 4E FRCG, especially as I think it's nowhere near as inspiring or well-written as the Grey Boxed Set, can compare to that.

 

[Primal]

If sticking with canon is that important, and not having to make things up is also important, then you've got a serious problem running an FR game. Because most places just don't have enough detail for you. You HAVE to make up most of the information your players demand outside a tiny number of places. Also, even if you play in one of those and the players show no interest at all in going somewhere else you will run out of adventure hooks in that location at some point, after which you have to Make Stuff Up.

Sticking to canon is not as important as having a detailed setting (did you note that I tend to ignore all RSEs, unless they fit my campaign?). Now, I could grab any Volo's Guide, for example, and run a game in most of the settings described in them. Add in the boxed sets and FR Adventures, and there's no need for "extra" details. Just to name a few such places: Scornubel, Arabel, Suzail, Elturel, Hill's Edge, Berdusk, Silverymoon -- not to mention, naturally, Waterdeep. And, whatever details I might feel are still missing to satusfy my players, I could do myself. With Volo's Guide to the North, I could have a pretty decent "Tour de North"-type of campaign, with even smaller settings detailed "well enough" (major inns, shops, NPCs, adventure locations) for me to use them with minor tweaks.

And, yes, I have to "Make Stuff Up" for each session anyway (the session's adventure, at least) -- that wasn't the point. If the players wouldn't want the level of details they do, I wouldn't *force* it on them. Also, over the years I've kind of learned how to "hook" them; no need to worry about "wasting" adventure hooks. For example, if I tried the old cliché with the "mysterious employer" at the local inn + lots of combat encounters, they wouldn't think it was a fun session. Spending half the session in role-playing with themselves and the NPCs, with adventure hooks tied to character backgrounds... now, that's their idea of fun.

Anyway, my point was, I'd have to start with a "clean slate" in 4E FR, because I could hardly expect to grab my 2E/3E accessories and use the stuff "as is". In fact, it would probably be easier to pick a small village and start from scratch, than trying to update the info and the maps.

Why did the Realms become the most popular D&D setting? It didn't. That's Homebrew Game.

By a huge margin.

I

I suspect that you realized I'm talking of D&D settings *published* by TSR/WoTC.

 

[EmboldenedNavigator]

Reading the new FR book, I wondered why they didn't just have Abeir be its own world that was parallel to and somehow connected with Toril. Sort of like the shadow world that its conceived as being: a reflection but otherwise new and different. Have the same gods, the same basic tropes, organizations and characters who have counterparts in Toril, but acknowledge that Toril was still Toril and, if old school players desired, could be supported with the crunch written for the new Abeir setting.

 

[Wormwood]

I don't think 4E FRCG, especially as I think it's nowhere near as inspiring or well-written as the Grey Boxed Set, can compare to that.

I don't dislike the current FRCG as much as most, but I otherwise completely agree with your post.

The Grey Box is full of flavor, history, and (most of all) possibilities. As a bonus, it is damn near system-neutral.

So much so, in fact, that I'm going to use it---and ONLY it---for my next campaign. And honestly, I *look forward* to having my group come up with fun and creative ways of incorporating 4e's races/classes into the setting.

Hmm. I wonder what I'm going to do with Sembia . . .

 

[Primal]

I don't dislike the current FRCG as much as most, but I otherwise completely agree with your post.

The Grey Box is full of flavor, history, and (most of all) possibilities. As a bonus, it is damn near system-neutral.

So much so, in fact, that I'm going to use it---and ONLY it---for my next campaign. And honestly, I *look forward* to having my group come up with fun and creative ways of incorporating 4e's races/classes into the setting.

Hmm. I wonder what I'm going to do with Sembia . . .

Use a lot of backstabbing, conspiring merchants as NPCs in the campaign?

 

[Wormwood]

Use a lot of backstabbing, conspiring merchants as NPCs in the campaign?

Ah, but that's the genius of the Grey Box: Sembia is undefined and wide open for DMs to use as they see fit.

I was considering placing Freeport in it, actually.