Why *Dont* you like Forgotten Realms?

[Swedish Chef]

I'm probably going to get dumped on for this, but here goes.

I like the Realms.

Yup, I said it. I like the Realms.

My group has played in the Realms for the last 20 years. I've got the majority of books/supplements/boxed sets that have been published with the exception of the 4ed stuff, mainly because we don't play 4ed. That, and I really don't like the magical floaty bits of land idea (and yes, I really disliked that in Avatar).

For me, the Realms is still a great big sandbox. Elminister? Doesn't exist in my version of the Realms. Same with Blackstaff, Alustriel, etc, etc, etc. Doesn't change a damned thing as far as my group is concerned.

Novels? They were fun to read when I was a teenager. After that, I ignored them, as many of them were written by hacks (in my opinion). As for them being canon - not in my Realms. Of course, no one in the group reads them either, so it doesn't matter.

As for the whole history and mish mash of cultures? I find some of the splat books to be fun to read. However, my group likes playing in the North or the Dalelands, so that's what we stick to. The rest of the cultures are there, but since the campaigns never wander very far, it has never been an issue.

For our group, I am the one who mainly DMs, and I'm the one who buys the Realms specific splat books. The rest of the group just isn't interested in spending that kind of money, so they don't. And it works out just fine for all of us. They are the big heroes (or dastardly villains) of the area for the duration of the campaign, and that's the way they like it.

And I can still drop anything in pretty much anywhere I like. I want the city of Grayhawk to be there? Guess what, Silverymoon or Secomber or Neverwinter are now using the map for the city of Grayhawk. The group cares not a wit. I want the Temple of Elemental Evil to be hidden in the forest of Cormanthyr? That's where it is.

For me, the main reason I like the Realms is that there is so much available for it. I no longer have the time to build worlds like I did when I was a teenager, so having stuff that I can easily look up and use is great for me. As to how vanilla or over the top the "fantasy" aspect is, again, I control that, and it works for our group. Archmages in every town? Not in my game.

 

[Primal]

I hate to be this harsh given that Ed is probably a great DM, but since I can't lie either...

1) Very large portions of the setting appear to have the simple schtick of being the simplified analog of some real world location, mythology or culture. But even that doesn't really capture the problem, because this isn't HARN World or Birthright with complex takes on real world cultures. It's barely even the 'Known World' with its clear pastiches. As someone else put it so well, "It's high fantasy at it's worst, most boring, and most cliche. Forgotten Realms is not so much a high fantasy campaign setting based on medieval Europe as it is a high fantasy campaign setting based on high fantasy campaign settings."

I know that this thread is meant for negative opinions of FR, but I think your post (and several others as well) contains some misconceptions about FR. In my opinion, that is.

First of all, Ed might have created the Realms, but his "Home Realms" is not the same setting TSR printed and expanded upon. As far as I know, Ed's FR does not contain any direct RW analogies. When he sold the rights to TSR, he effectively relished his creative control over the setting. And TSR -- and/or the freelancers who actually designed the gazetteers -- apparently thought it would be cool if FR had its own Greece, Egypt, Inuits, Vikings and whatnot. Based on what I've read on Candlekeep.com, I'd guess Ed's take on Mulhorand or the Great Glacier is dramatically different from the published Realms.

2) The world doesn't appear to have been the product of any deep world building. It looks like a bottom up world. The geography and climate is haphazard. As such, it's really no more sophisticated or interesting than an average world building DM's world and in many cases much less so. The only difference is its published and therefore has had more time spent providing minor (and usually irrelevant) details.

Again, this is largely due to TSR's erratic design decisions; most 1E/2E FR supplements were really bad -- excepting, IMO, the books written by Ed, Eric Boyd and Steven Schend. As someone who loves details and minutiae, I found Volo's Guides or the "Deity Books", for example, to be tresure troves of information.

3) It's got an incredibly dumb pantheon of dieties and it seems utterly unreasonable that anyone would be motivated to worship the pack of bland shallow and uninteresting beings out of genuine piety. I mean, boiled down to its core dieties you have a 'God of Paladins', a 'God of Rangers', a 'God of Magic-Users', a 'God of Barbarians', a 'God of Thieves', a 'God of Fighters', a generic catch all 'God of Adventurers', and even a 'God of Clerics' (who appropriately has uber-cleric followers in 3e). Then you have the snearing curled mustache evil versions of the above. It's a pantheon strongly tied to the D&D meta-game, and honestly I can't think of a single gaming pantheon that is less interesting. Even the Order of the Stick has a more interesting cosmology.

I haven't heard of a "God of Clerics", "God of Fighters" or a "God of Barbarians" in the FR pantheon -- or their evil counterparts. Besides, the deities you mentioned above (Gods of Strength, Magic/Magic-Users, Thieves, Warriors) are more or less featured in pretty much every D&D setting (and in many other fantasy RPG settings as well), because they're archetypes. Doesn't Greyhawk and Core 3E/4E have its God of War and Strength in Kord? Doesn't Boccob or Ioun represent Knowledge? Bahamut the Paladins? I just don't think your comments are fair, that's all. The original Mystra, for example, was LN -- TSR killed her during ToT and implemented a CG Deity of Magic (Midnight) into FR.

4) I've never seen any setting more grostesquely inflicted with 'DM PC's'. Eleminster is just the most famous example of the general trend of 'these NPC's will always be cooler than you are' which permeates the entire setting, but there are many other ones equally as bad. This impression is only strengthened by the innumerable second edition supplements and rule books designed to enforce that core truth.

AFAIK, Elminster is not a DMPC, but a "mentor-like" character whose role TSR wanted to emphasize; IIRC, they told Ed to make him the central figure in FR fiction. As far as powerful NPCs go, it's more or less the norm in fantasy fiction. And in a world filled with powerful evil NPCs and monsters, I'd expect that there are either a large amount of mid-to-high level NPCs to "stave off the Darkness" (if you ask me, the whole 'Points of Light' concept in 4E is a bit silly; I can't fathom why Evil hasn't overrun the world if there are no significant NPCs anywhere).

I don't see them "stealing" the spotlight from the PCs, however. I wonder how many players would be happy if you forced their high-level PCs to constantly fight low-level threats (with virtually no XP or treasure). I'm fairly sure that they'd rather fight the likes of Szass Tam or Fzoul Chembryl than goblins or bandits. And I imagine this would be how Elminster, the Seven Sisters, Khelben et al. feel.

I'll admit that FR has a LOT of powerful wizards; however, most of them are more or less involved in plane-hopping, research or other machinations of their own. Quite a significant portion of them seem more or less insane.

5) What is true for its pantheon and the 'DM PC's' is true to one extent or the other about everything in the setting. While FR did force me to question the long held assumption that 99% of the world realistically had to be either 0th or 1st level, even after holding that idea up to a candle it still could not justify every innkeeper being a retired 10th level fighter and every village having at least one NPC of 9th to 14th level. FR suffers from tremendous level inflation, and in general FR NPC's of every sort are about twice the level of NPC's found in every prior setting. Taking the numbers and dividing by two helps alot, and is pretty much essential for any NPC inflicted with 'coolness'. FR didn't create the general trend of number inflation that D&D has suffered from for 40 years now, but it certainly helped push the idea that bigger numbers are inherently cooler and better than smaller ones - even ironicly in FR's case that a high level PC is relatively weaker to the rest of the setting than in any other published setting. I mean there are usually several 20th level characters in every town with more than 20,000 inhabitants. The splat books are filled with 15th-20th level fighters that are 7 feet tall, wield two swords, and have roughly 18/00 strength (or higher!). It's utterly ridiculous.

This I actually agree with, but I wonder how much some of Ed's earliest campaigns influenced this; namely, it seemed that some of his players were totally okay with robbing merchants and even killing other PCs just to gain more XP and treasure.

I also experienced the same when I tried running my first games to a group of extrovert, teenaged players, whose first question was: "You mean we can do ANYTHING we want in this game? Like... kill people?". So, yeah, my first games tended to turn into complete hackfests as the PCs ignored any adventure hooks to rape, pillage and conquer small villages. Pretty soon my games, too, featured several 10-15 level retired adventurers even in the smallest backwoods hamlets.

Still, I don't know why TSR chose to publish those NPCs "as is" from Ed's own campaigns (for example, Cormyr has quite many 0-level merchants with racks of wands and smiths with flying anvils or Helmed Horror guardians and whatnot) .

6) The quality of material published for the FR setting varies from the juvenile to the amateurish. Just how many truly interesting, gamable, or mature modules have been published for FR? The DL modules for all there flaws are less railroady, more sophisticated, and have a better setting than any thing published for FR. Any good campaign that occurs in the FR does so by accident and says more about the talents of the DM (and his willingness to throw out the cannon) than it does of the deep measure of thought (or lack of it) that went into the FR.

I'd rank anything written by the esteemed Lorelords mentioned above as quality material. However, you're absolutely correct that too many freelancers were free to do anything they wanted with FR.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Forgotten Realms and Dark Sun are my favorite game settings.

However, what I least like about the FR is Drizzt. It just seems to me that Drizzt was created to break the rules and for a power gamer.

And I like Elminster, but he won't exist in my games.

It just seems to me that whenever Elminster exists people want to flock to him rather than help the townspeople repel a Drow invasion from under their home town.

 

[Celebrim]

I know that this thread is meant for negative opinions of FR, but I think your post (and several others as well) contains some misconceptions about FR. In my opinion, that is.

Yeah, I think that's the size of it. What you see as misconceptions are I think, just different ways of looking at the same thing.

First of all, Ed might have created the Realms, but his "Home Realms" is not the same setting TSR printed and expanded upon.

That, and much else of what you wrote, is known to me. I am aware that Ed can't be blamed for everything that was done with his setting; however, I am also aware that much of what is worst about the FR can be laid directly at his feet. Namely, modules like Haunted Halls of Eveningstar and the 'Avatar Trilogy', supplements like Seven Sisters and The Code of the Harpers, and the Eliminster novels cannot be blamed on anyone else and in fact are the very things he likes about the setting. In my opinion these rank as some of the worst products TSR ever published. So, yes, there is a matter of opinion here in that Ed's taste in a setting is definately not mine (or apparantly yours).

That's not to say that he's not a good or even excellent DM, and I think the Icewind Dale trilogy stands up as an excellent 'story hour' (if not necessarily novels), but I don't think nearly as much of him as a setting or rules smith and honestly I think that his era contributes greatly to the decline of D&D and overall quality of writing at TSR. I congradulate him on his success, but find it somewhat baffling. As a fellow DM, I'm sure he would have much to teach, and I wouldn't mind setting at his table, but I don't think I'd ever buy any of his products (again, once bitten...).

Again, this is largely due to TSR's erratic design decisions; most 1E/2E FR supplements were really bad -- excepting, IMO, the books written by Ed, Eric Boyd and Steven Schend. As someone who loves details and minutiae, I found Volo's Guides or the "Deity Books", for example, to be tresure troves of information.

I like minutiae as much as the next guy, but I can't help but feel that things like the Volo Guides are - like for example most GURPS supplements - books that gamers like to read, rather than books gamers actually use at the game table.

I haven't heard of a "God of Clerics", "God of Fighters" or a "God of Barbarians" in the FR pantheon -- or their evil counterparts. Besides, the deities you mentioned above (Gods of Strength, Magic/Magic-Users, Thieves, Warriors) are more or less featured in pretty much every D&D setting (and in many other fantasy RPG settings as well), because they're archetypes.

No, they aren't, and no they aren't. The needs of a real world religion differ dramatically from those of a game religion. If you look at real world religions, say the familiar Greek Olympians but any will do, you won't find gods of theives, magic, or even (typically) strength as being the most prominent members of the pantheon. In fact, the personifications or patrons of those things are typically very minor deities or else that role is a minor aspect of the dieties portfolio. In the real world - and for that matter fantasy worlds - most people aren't theives, fighters, or wizards. There concerns are for food, crops, seasons, money, sex, family, weather, leisure, the law and its proper establishment, and various trades necessary to the community and the pantheon will primaily feature patronage for those sorts of things. Central American pantheons often had like a half dozen corn deities. Real world dieties have complex portfolios. Hermes is the god of messangers, lawyers, and thieves and is invoked when people want to win a race. Diana is the goddess of the moon and virgins and hunting. But even that underestimates the complexity and misses the point, because real world polytheistic deities are generally about oral traditions concerning them and have hallmarks of that kind of conception. It's that that makes them sufficiently compelling to induce people to believe and worship them. The FR deities have no such hallmarks. They look like, read like, and essentially are game aids.

As a religion, the FR deities fall absolutely flat. They exist only to provide patrons for adventurers. So you have Mystra the goddess of M-U's, Meilikki the goddess of Rangers, Silvanus the god of Druids, Torm the god of Paladins, Mask the God of Theives, Helm the God of fighters, Oghma the God of Bards and so on and so forth. And (jokingly) you have Lathlander the God of Clerics. This is OotS sort of breaking of the fourth wall, and the thing is not only is it not meant to be funny, but OotS is actually more complex and mature in its conceptions despite being about breaking the 4th wall.

The thing is, you can't blame me for this perception. This is how the dieties were described in their first introduction and they are largely still described in those terms. Some complications arose as they were detailed to a greater degree, but there obvious first inspiration is as class patrons. Anything else about them was added on tangentally to their primary role, rather than figuring out from the primary role what mercenary trades might esteem the deity. You have to get way out into the fringes of the pantheon to even find dieties that remotely seem to be archetypes and which makes some sense as dieties. The pantheon is almost entirely backwards. What makes this particularly bad is that many of the dieties are just directly stolen from the 1st edition Deities and Demigods (Finnish, Celtic, and Greek pantheons particularly) and generally have about as much depth not as the real world deity, but of that books monster entry.

The original Mystra, for example, was LN -- TSR killed her during ToT and implemented a CG Deity of Magic (Midnight) into FR.

I adventured with a Paladin of the original Mystra (DM ruled that Paladins could chose a patron up to one step removed from LG) for like 4 real life years. This isn't misconceptions. This is different perceptions of the same thing. If you want to see what I like and admire in an invented polytheist pantheon read 'The Book of the Righteous' or in literature Bujold's 'Curse of Chalion'. Those excellently conceived dieties I can imagine people piously worshiping. The Greyhawk pantheon(s) are also much better concieved than the FR.

AFAIK, Elminster is not a DMPC...

His role in modules and Ed's obvious attachment and even self-identification with the wizard argues against that assessment. Many of the early FR modules are strict railroads where you watch more important characters than you do thier thing while you are essentially unable to alter the outcome. They feature text walls not merely of descriptions, but of events you are to witness.

As far as powerful NPCs go, it's more or less the norm in fantasy fiction.

There are two problems there (at least). First of all, this isn't 'fantasy fiction' we are talking about. This is gaming material. Gaming material has different standards than generic literature or novels because its meant to be related to in a different way. And second of all, the FR model was not the norm in gaming material. It marked different to see 30th level characters who had divine gifts that separated them from mere mortals being not only the foils of the party that they were meant to overcome (because no one else could) but the actual movers and shakers among the forces of good. Compare with for example Greyhawk, where most of the big names were in effect actual player characters (or their enemies). For FR, you could basically say that only of Drizzt.

I don't see them "stealing" the spotlight from the PCs, however.

Then you didn't actually play much published FR material either.

This I actually agree with, but I wonder how much some of Ed's earliest campaigns influenced this; namely, it seemed that some of his players were totally okay with robbing merchants and even killing other PCs just to gain more XP and treasure.

I'm aware of what probably was the initial compelling reason behind it. You act like we DMs haven't all experienced that. But not all of us felt compelled to adopt an Ultima style model where the shop keepers and gaurds were some of the most powerful monsters in the game. There are other approaches than "Pretty soon my games, too, featured several 10-15 level retired adventurers even in the smallest backwoods hamlets."

 

[Celebrim]

I'm probably going to get dumped on for this, but here goes.

I like the Realms....Elminister? Doesn't exist in my version of the Realms. Same with Blackstaff, Alustriel, etc, etc, etc...As for them being canon - not in my Realms. Of course, no one in the group reads them either, so it doesn't matter...The rest of the cultures are there, but since the campaigns never wander very far, it has never been an issue.... I want the city of Grayhawk to be there? Guess what, Silverymoon or Secomber or Neverwinter are now using the map for the city of Grayhawk...I want the Temple of Elemental Evil to be hidden in the forest of Cormanthyr? That's where it is. Archmages in every town? Not in my game.[/

I'd probably like _your_ forgotten realms too. But, you've house ruled the setting to the point that its difficult to call it the Forgotten Realms.

And in my experience, this is what the best FR DM's do - they just dump what they don't like and use what they can. There are things about the material available for FR that are very useful, even if the the FR as a setting as a whole isn't. For example, just having all those city maps and names at hand can save you an enormous amount of time as a DM.

 

[Alzrius]

Okay, I have to speak up here...

Yeah, I think that's the size of it. What you see as misconceptions are I think, just different ways of looking at the same thing.

Maybe, but a lot of the following are genuine misconceptions. On your part, I mean.

That, and much else of what you wrote, is known to me. I am aware that Ed can't be blamed for everything that was done with his setting;

[...]

That's not to say that he's not a good or even excellent DM, and I think the Icewind Dale trilogy stands up as an excellent 'story hour' (if not necessarily novels),

Said story hour was written by R. A. Salvatore, not Ed Greenwood. So...yeah, no credit for Ed there.

No, they aren't, and no they aren't.

Yes, they are, and yes they are. This one isn't a matter of opinion, it's a question of fact. Greyhawk had archetypal gods long before the Forgotten Realms was published.

The needs of a real world religion differ dramatically from those of a game religion. If you look at real world religions, say the familiar Greek Olympians but any will do, you won't find gods of theives, magic, or even (typically) strength as being the most prominent members of the pantheon. In fact, the personifications or patrons of those things are typically very minor deities or else that role is a minor aspect of the dieties portfolio. In the real world - and for that matter fantasy worlds - most people aren't theives, fighters, or wizards. There concerns are for food, crops, seasons, money, sex, family, weather, leisure, the law and its proper establishment, and various trades necessary to the community and the pantheon will primaily feature patronage for those sorts of things. Central American pantheons often had like a half dozen corn deities. Real world dieties have complex portfolios. Hermes is the god of messangers, lawyers, and thieves and is invoked when people want to win a race. Diana is the goddess of the moon and virgins and hunting. But even that underestimates the complexity and misses the point, because real world polytheistic deities are generally about oral traditions concerning them and have hallmarks of that kind of conception. It's that that makes them sufficiently compelling to induce people to believe and worship them. The FR deities have no such hallmarks. They look like, read like, and essentially are game aids.

I have to admit, this is a truly excellent point...or would be, if Primal had been comparing the Forgotten Realms deities to real-world religions and faiths. Except, oh yeah, he didn't. He was comparing them to other D&D deities...and in that regard, he's totally correct.

As a religion, the FR deities fall absolutely flat. They exist only to provide patrons for adventurers. So you have Mystra the goddess of M-U's, Meilikki the goddess of Rangers, Silvanus the god of Druids, Torm the god of Paladins, Mask the God of Theives, Helm the God of fighters, Oghma the God of Bards and so on and so forth.

Not at all like Boccob the god of M-U's, Ehlonna the god of Rangers, Beory the god of Druids, Heironeous the god of Paladins, Olidammara the God of Thieves, Kord the God of fighters, Trithereon the God of Bards and so on and so forth.

Yeah, the Realms are so unique in how their deities are so easily reduced to being just "patrons for adventurers" when you toss out everything that's ever been written for them after their summaries in the first boxed set. Forget crap like the "Faiths & Avatars" series - despite their consistent high praise even after all these years - the Realms gods are all duds.

And (jokingly) you have Lathlander the God of Clerics.

It's "Lathander" and he's the god of spring, dawn, and birth. It's like calling Pholtus "the God of Clerics."

This is OotS sort of breaking of the fourth wall, and the thing is not only is it not meant to be funny, but OotS is actually more complex and mature in its conceptions despite being about breaking the 4th wall.

Or maybe it's just the fact that you seem to have just enough knowledge of what you're talking about to have no actual idea what you're talking about. Seriously, you've gone entirely off the rails with this line of reasoning.

The thing is, you can't blame me for this perception.

Oh, I think you better check again.

I adventured with a Paladin of the original Mystra (DM ruled that Paladins could chose a patron up to one step removed from LG) for like 4 real life years.

You...actually spent four years of your real life going on adventures with an actual paladin...of Mystra...?

I think you might be having some misconceptions about-

This isn't misconceptions.

Er...okay then...

The Greyhawk pantheon(s) are also much better concieved than the FR.

See above.

Then you didn't actually play much published FR material either.

Man, compared to the adventures you and that paladin of Mystra apparently had, nobody played much of the Realms.

 

[Pseudonym]

Man, compared to the adventures you and that paladin of Mystra apparently had, nobody played much of the Realms.

You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Alzrius again.

Thanks for conjuring up memories of Tom Hanks in the steam tunnels.

 

[Uzzy]

I'd probably like _your_ forgotten realms too. But, you've house ruled the setting to the point that its difficult to call it the Forgotten Realms.

And in my experience, this is what the best FR DM's do - they just dump what they don't like and use what they can. There are things about the material available for FR that are very useful, even if the the FR as a setting as a whole isn't. For example, just having all those city maps and names at hand can save you an enormous amount of time as a DM.

Exactly. The level of detail is, for me, a lifesaver. I can consult huge amounts of material for inspiration as to what sort of game I want to run. If I need an NPC, there's thousands. If I need a city, there's hundreds. If I need a plot hook, there's dozens. But somehow this doesn't stop me creating my own NPC's, or cities or whatever. I simply do not understand it when people argue that the level of detail stops them creating. Are DM's unable to ignore the detail they don't need and use the detail they want to?

And sure, there are setting lawyers out there who have read every single product. But again, you're the DM. Remind them of rule zero, and if needed, grab a heavy gaming book and smack em round the head, telling them that it's your world, and that as the DM you have the right to change things. Further, aren't there setting lawyers for anything? Why does that only seem to be a bad mark against the Forgotten Realms?

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The many eras of published FR demonstrate the worst sins of design-by-committee, especially one where the committee has significant overrepresentation by the marketing department.

But do I avoid FR products? As FR products nowadays, yes, but not on their value as a standalone product. I have occasionally bought an FR product when it had something worth pulling for my own homebrew . . . that hasn't happened in many years though.

I used to be an FR-fan, like Barastrondo, the Gray Box inspired me to build settings and filled me with ideas. It doesn't fill me with wonder anymore.

 

[the Jester]

Not at all like Boccob the god of M-U's, Ehlonna the god of Rangers, Beory the god of Druids, Heironeous the god of Paladins, Olidammara the God of Thieves, Kord the God of fighters, Trithereon the God of Bards and so on and so forth.

Er, that's not how the GH pantheons work at all.

If you were a magic-user, yes, you MIGHT worship Boccob. But you also might worship Wee Jas, Zagyg or another god entirely. If you're a FR mage, you pretty much worship Mystra. Likewise, a fighter might choose to follow Hextor, Heironeous, Kord, Kelanen or any number of other gods, demipowers or quasi-deities.

FR's deities, imho, were much more one-dimensional (at least in their initial incarnation). Greyhawk's pantheons- because there are several- seem to have a lot more depth to me. But that may well be because of my personal affection for GH vs. my personal antipathy towards FR.