D&D 3E/3.5 5e Forgotten Realms - should it be closer to 3e or 4e?

[Yora]

I'd say I reached that point somewhere in mid 3rd Edition. Yes, Sembia and the Border Kingdoms where not really described, as were some parts around Turmish. But those regions were pretty much completely blank without any incentive to play there.
I think a good campaign setting offers a glimps at something that makes players and DM think that it would be exciting to explore it further, learn more about what's going on and who is who. But at least in my perception, every time there was something worse exploring, there was also an explaination what exactly you would find there. To a great deal, this was my own fault, because I read tonnes of material on the realms. And yes, you have to hand the DMs something to work with if their players want to explore a place. But I think they went too far. It's okay to state what is the current state of things, but all too often, you would also get the ntire background information that explains the whole backstory. And I think it's much more interesting if you go to places, solve the current issue at hand, but also leave with a sense of wonder about how the location came to be and what it was used for. In the Forgotten Realms, I feel that much too often this isn't the case and when you find a ruin in region X, well informed players instantly know the entire history of the culture that build it. People may have different experiences, but supposed you visit Karse or Myth Drannor, there's a good chance a couple of players already know the entire history of the place and come to metagame realizations whom they are currently dealing with and how they can be defeated.
Keeping things vague and not answering all questions is something I enjoy in a setting and in that regard, the grey box does the job best. In AD&D, you also had separate booklets for players and DMs, so players could inform themselves about the world without having to read all the supposedly secret stuff as well. Starting in 3rd Edition there was only one big book of everything that was read by both DMs and players, even if as a player would like to only read about the commonly known things.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I think the people that like the gray box version are the ones that don't like all the detail and lore that came later. They want something that is pretty bare to do with as they please. They were some of the ones WotC was catering too when they decided to obliterate the Realms for 4E. I personally like all the detail. It's what made the Realms seem like a living, breathing world instead of just another campaign setting. I like the 3E FRCS the best, but I would take the gray box or the 2nd edition setting over the awful 4E one. What they did to the Realms with 4E was a travesty, and they should strive to support a version of the Realms untainted by the sepllplague if they want to win back fans that bailed with the awful 4E retcon of the setting.

I like the 1E best as a starting point, I like 4E, but from there I in no way fit your characterization. I didn't even buy any 4E Realms material because it was obvious that the ham-handed nonsense of the Time of Troubles, compounded by 3E changes, had reached its ultimate fruition in the spellplague.

Nonetheless, I do quite like the details in the Realms, and agree that I see no reason to see it as anything special absent that detail. It is merely that not all details are created equal. Details in maps, of places, of NPC personalities, of lairs, the Volo guides, and so forth--these are all useful, and largely edition neutral.

Moreover, the reason that the gray box was touted as being something that you could fill in yourself was that they had not gotten around to filling it in yet. They made a virtue of necessity. Even before 2E, some of the 1E supplements had started filling it in.

So what I'd really like is a 1E Realms--more or less--with some of those accumulated details. An alternate timeline would be perfect. Or if that is insufficiently explanatory, and alternate dimension, where some alternate Realms that more or less has the 1E feel, but happens to fit the mechanics of 5E--that would be perfect. Yeah, reboot is exactly what it needs. Keep the good stuff, and shed the bad--with Time of Troubles and all of its nasty children at the top of the list to shed.

 

[Kzach]

Why does the description of a campaign world have to be tied to *any* edition?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you haven't been involved in D&D for very long because most people who have, would know the answer to this question already.

So here it is... they had to accommodate rules changes into how the setting functioned. Rules for gods changed, rules for magic changed, rules for monsters changed, rules for planes changed and suddenly the setting didn't make sense anymore with these changes.

To explain how the fundamental nature of the universe suddenly changed on everyone, they introduced the Time of Troubles and the Spellplague (3e was a plague on it's own so it didn't need a catastrophic event to explain its changes).

Now, technically none of these events were really necessary. People who wanted to use the new edition could just say, "Eh, it's always worked this way..." and move on, which is probably why there is so much anger and confusion over the whole debacle. People who don't care ask, "Why?" and are puzzled by it, people who do care ask, "Why?" and cry into their milk over it. At the end of the day, what it was really about was selling new books for a new edition with new material.

 

[Yora]

And those are situations where retcons are just the right tool for the right job. Just pretend that it has always been that way. I think 4th Edition Eberron did just that. And between AD&D 1st and 2nd Edition, I think there were not even any actual changes at all. Just changes to how you calculate character stats. And since most books didn't have NPC stat blocks or character option chapters, there wasn't anything to adjust in the first place.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

The kind of thinking that considers it a good idea to kill of a few gods to help explain why assassins (the class) are no longer present, is the kind of thinking that considers it a good idea to pull the fire alarm and set of the sprinkler system in the entire office building because someone lit up a cigarette in a non-smoking area. It does work to solve the immediate problem, but you could probably come up with a couple of less drastic measures that would handle it.

That's bad enough. Having then established that the fire alarm pulling as a precedent, you go on to repeat this move, well ...

 

[GM Dave]

You can not apply today's logic to several decades removed business decisions.

At the time of 1st ed shift to 2nd ed there were some very strong market forces in parent groups that thought DnD meant satanic worshiping cultists that were going to corrupt the world.

The whole RPG movement and miniatures movement took the hit.

Gods of evil that advocated murder were out. Warhammer and Warhammer 40K were all but 'purged' of mention of demons (and what was left were removed from their former nipple natures).

Drizz't owes his existance to the change as he was a replacement character created in a five minute call as Salvatore was told that there would be no thief/assassins in the 2ed.

The Time of Troubles was most importantly an attempt to 'blue code' the realms. The game that had originally been played by Bohemian college students was now being spread to high school and grade school students and an effort was made to clean up the 'objectionable' bits.

The internet, television, and movies have done much to spread a 'view' of gaming with DnD portrayed as on the more 'normal' side and Apocalypse World or Poison'd on the fringe or 'avente garde' (a safe distance away from the Pokemon players).

-------------------

What I have my biggest problem with the realms is actually not with 'setting' but with the writing. It seems that every year there is new 'crisis' that threatens the realms and affects 'every' realm (or at least most of the popular ones that you'd want to game in).

What year is this? Oh, the dragons have decided to go crazy and attack everyone.

What year is this? Oh, the priates have decided to attack everywhere along the coast.

What year is this? Oh, giant ameboas from space have escaped their containment vessel and are going to kill us all.

Each crisis has 4-6 authored books telling of the 'Doom of the Realms'.

I like Kenny on South Park and the first few times he dies is 'I can't believe they wrote that and showed that on a cartoon'. Now, it is oh, yeah, I guess something had to happen.

------------------------

And while richness is great, that richness has included plenty of stuff that makes almost anyone look at the map and say, 'what the heck were they thinking'. (There are previous posters who have covered this topic in much better detail then I can).

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Nothing in that list that can't be fixed more cleanly by a retcon. If it walks like a retcon, quacks like a retcon, then just admit it is a retcon. All the attempts to slide around that and pretend it isn't a retcon is where the problems arise.

 

[MooMan68]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you haven't been involved in D&D for very long because most people who have, would know the answer to this question already.

I've been playing D&D since 1980, I've purchased the grey box and the 3e hardcover. I never really used it much, but I read it. And I think back at how much edition specific detail they provided for 3e and shake my head.

In my mind it's backwards thinking. The rules are there to support the story, the story isn't there to fit the rules.

 

[Yora]

And you also get the effect that it becomes more difficult to use the material with a different edition or different game.

 

[Kzach]

I've been playing D&D since 1980, I've purchased the grey box and the 3e hardcover. I never really used it much, but I read it. And I think back at how much edition specific detail they provided for 3e and shake my head.

I'm surprised you don't know this, then, as it's a rather widely discussed and popular topic amongst D&D discussion groups. Hell, I knew about it before the internet even existed because it was always a topic of contention in groups I joined and formed.

In my mind it's backwards thinking. The rules are there to support the story, the story isn't there to fit the rules.

Actually it's always kind-of annoyed me that the story never fits the rules. I wish they'd put much more thought into the impact of rules on a fantasy milieu. In fact, this is another popular topic amongst D&D nerds: in a magical world with Continual Light and Detect Lie, wouldn't we have a 24/7 society with no crime?