D&D 5E Campaign Settings 5e- Why I want to Forget the Realms

[Remathilis]

Yeah, it's a big "transmedia" problem in that the presence of certain kinds of fantasy literary protagonists kind of wrecks the game world. Competing media have competing desires. When you're reading a novel about Drizz'zt you want him to be an awesome self-insert badass. When you're playing a game in FR, you want your characters to be that, so when the DM is controlling a character that steals that thunder....

Hence my dislike of Dragonlance.

Oddly though, it doesn't seem to have permeated through other settings the same way: nobody complains of Gord ruining Greyhawk, Sorak ruining Dark Sun, Dane ruining Eberron, or Jandar Sunstar ruining Ravenloft. Of course, none of them have 1/10th the popularity of Drizzt, but I really doubt anyone playing in Dark Sun is wondering why Sorak isn't here to stop things or why Gord hasn't killed Iuz already...

Then again, I think Drizzt and Elminister get lumped together unfairly, since they are two separate problems. Drizzt isn't any more powerful than your average D&D protagonist, so it makes sense he's not solving problems everywhere across the Realms (no more so than assuming Jandar should take out every Dark Lord in Ravenloft because he once bested Strahd). Elminster is a Gandalf-expy who suffers the same general problem of Gandalf (if he's so powerful, why not summon eagles and fly over Mordor, or at least use more magic to aid the Fellowship? questions). They just BOTH happen to live on the same planet together. (Well, along with Dragonbait, Alias, and dozens of other novel protagonists unmentioned in these discussions).

In the end, they are popular. And popular to some = overexposed.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Oddly though, it doesn't seem to have permeated through other settings the same way: nobody complains of Gord ruining Greyhawk, Sorak ruining Dark Sun, Dane ruining Eberron, or Jandar Sunstar ruining Ravenloft. Of course, none of them have 1/10th the popularity of Drizzt, but I really doubt anyone playing in Dark Sun is wondering why Sorak isn't here to stop things or why Gord hasn't killed Iuz already...

The rub is that the one or two characters in dark sun or ravenloft aren't for the most part anything anyone cares about... If I (the biggest DS fan I know) sat down and was told "In my darksun XXX didn't exsist" I wouldn't care, but if I told (the ones I know personally in real space) forgotten realms fans "In my realms none of the chosen are higher then 8th level, and elminster just plain doesn't exsist" I would expect some blow back... to put it mildly.

Then again, I think Drizzt and Elminister get lumped together unfairly, since they are two separate problems.

100% agree. I dislike them for very different reason and could easily run the game if one of them was not in the setting, while the other one I wouldn't even notice...

Drizzt isn't any more powerful than your average D&D protagonist, so it makes sense he's not solving problems everywhere across the Realms (no more so than assuming Jandar should take out every Dark Lord in Ravenloft because he once bested Strahd).

Yup, he could easily be just a 7th level drow ranger, and no one would notice...

Elminster is a Gandalf-expy who suffers the same general problem of Gandalf (if he's so powerful, why not summon eagles and fly over Mordor, or at least use more magic to aid the Fellowship? questions).

He is WAY more then Gandalf... I would kill for him to be ONLY Gandalf... I have players who quote him lieing to and desiving an over deity OA or AO I'm not sure witch it is.

They just BOTH happen to live on the same planet together. (Well, along with Dragonbait, Alias, and dozens of other novel protagonists unmentioned in these discussions).

I actually have many years ago brought up dragonbait, because he is the fav of one of the players... I think the god in that series is finder or quester of troubler I can't remember since I baned all discussion of realms lore at my table a few years ago now...

In the end, they are popular. And popular to some = overexposed.

It is kind of a perfect storm... El is a mary sue (literally an author insert who is all powerful and has sex with goddess and hot sorcerers and can solve any problem or choose not to) who is also very popular, and who is also part of an over exposed setting...

 

[I'm A Banana]

But just because you can call for help doesn't always mean you will call for help.

Oh, sure, but in a story about a ragtag group of newbie heroes who are trying to stop the alien invasion, if they fail to stop the aliens from invading earth, you want earth to be invaded. It's really unsatisfying if your hero turns to the terrified populace and says "I might die here today! But if I die, know that there's at least...like...50 other people who will hear about and will come running!"

And then Nick Fury was all, "Yeah, I called Tony Stark like an hour ago."

Oddly though, it doesn't seem to have permeated through other settings the same way: nobody complains of Gord ruining Greyhawk, Sorak ruining Dark Sun, Dane ruining Eberron, or Jandar Sunstar ruining Ravenloft. Of course, none of them have 1/10th the popularity of Drizzt, but I really doubt anyone playing in Dark Sun is wondering why Sorak isn't here to stop things or why Gord hasn't killed Iuz already...

I don't know that any of these characters have reached the level of wahoo Mary Sue that FR's heroes have. Again, it's the Wish Fulfillment Setting, where nerds sleep with goddesses and brooding rebels sigh at the injustice of it all.

In Dark Sun, the closest thing to a world-saving hero you have are those who overthrew the sorcerer-king of Tyr, and even that, as of 4e, is presented as potentially as problematic as it is redemptive and doesn't actually help the world as a whole much. It's pretty clear they can't do it again.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

TLR so apologies if said already: however... Having just about the same position as you, nearing the end of Phandelver and itching to do my own thing, I realised this:
FR is a massive map.
I have the original FR grey box with its huge maps, but even without them there are the maps within the LMOP adventure which give you a start.
Essentially, though, that's all they are. Maps. Maps of one wee bit of this huge continent.
Look at the map, choose a region of geography you like the look of. Change the names of places if you don't like them. Remove Elminster if you like. Use the map to fuel your own myths.
And if stuff doesn't work, well, the maps have edges. Start your campaign off that edge. A different country may not have the FR tropes like factions, for example.
My guys have decided the gold statue from Cragmaw Castle is a major relic so I'm running with that and they are all intrigued about these Sun Elves that no one has seen for centuries. Making it up as I go along, and just using the maps as maps, not lore.

 

[Jester David]

Oh, sure, but in a story about a ragtag group of newbie heroes who are trying to stop the alien invasion, if they fail to stop the aliens from invading earth, you want earth to be invaded. It's really unsatisfying if your hero turns to the terrified populace and says "I might die here today! But if I die, know that there's at least...like...50 other people who will hear about and will come running!"

And then Nick Fury was all, "Yeah, I called Tony Stark like an hour ago."

Which is a real meta-complaint, as Earth will never be invaded and the heroes won't fail.
But, really, it could be said about any genre where a few plucky heroes stand against seeming impossible odds. How come the Enterprise doesn't call in half of Starfleet to come help? How come Riggs and Murtaugh never call for back-up? Why doesn't Angel call an entire army of slayers for assistance? Why doesn't MI:6 dispatch an entire squad of double-ohs to handle a problem? Or why Harry Potter didn't go right to Dumbledore with half his problems. Or even, why doesn't the plucky band of adventurers recruit every member of the town guard and local militia to come into the dungeon and zerg rush the cultists?

Sometime the plot manages to handwave an explanation. Calls are being jammed. There's a time limit and back-up won't come fast enough. The hero went rogue and help won't come. The villain distracted the other forces. But most times it's just suspension of disbelief. Because, if the hero runs off for help there's no story and things are anticlimactic.

I don't know that any of these characters have reached the level of wahoo Mary Sue that FR's heroes have. Again, it's the Wish Fulfillment Setting, where nerds sleep with goddesses and brooding rebels sigh at the injustice of it all.

How about Dragonlance?
The Heroes of the Lance pretty much stole the thunder for everyone following the War of the Lance. A good half-dozen survived and one had the magical clout to attempt godhood. Plus, that entire setting was about the combined size of Cormyr, Sembia, and the Dales. So there's not even the excuse of events being too far away.
Heck, there's even the question of why the entire club of united wizards didn't just try and solve all the world's problems, since every wizard above 5th level was allied and working to defend magic. To say nothing of the knighthood mounted on good dragons and aided by good clerics who all follow the same gods.

The Realms developed a lot of high level NPCs. Because there's a bajillion books written there. But not every NPC really has a place in the campaign setting. The novel line is its own entity, and you're not bound to include someone's novel protagonist any more than you're forced to include their plot.
Many of the high level characters were retired. Or had their own problems and goals. Or were uninterested in travelling elsewhere in the continent. It's not like Elminster is just sitting around waiting for trouble to happen so he can teleport in and save the day: he has his own life and agenda and adventures. Drizzt is well known to gamers, but in the Realms he's probably unknown beyond Neverwinter. Waterdhavians likely have no idea who he is, because he hasn't adventured there for prolonged periods.
And, really, the characters are half the fun of the setting. Without them the Realms is a little less interesting. As seen by the 4e Realms where they jumped ahead 100 years to kill off all the human NPCs and then made Elminster unable to cast magic. It was just lacking personality.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Okay let me get this straight. You don't like the Realms because of the various NPC's that populate it but when someone mentions taking them out and adding your own you say why play in the world then?

There is a lot more to the Realms than the NPC's I'm afraid. I really don't think you know too much about the Realms with a statement like that.

Hey, let's keep things civil here. I asked a question and you called me ignorant instead of answering it. Not cool, dude.

Maps. Cities. Flavor.

People want campaigns for different reasons. I've run campaigns set in "special purpose" worlds (like Dark Sun) because of the flavor. Some people just might appreciate having to not think of countries, cities, forests, locales, etc. Whether it is Mystara, Greyhawk, FR, or something else.

I tend to default to GH because it is easy for me to run a campaign there. I can quickly think of thousands of things to do- whether it's Iuz, or the Scarlet Brotherhood, or the ruins in Blackmoor, or an adventure to the remnants of the Baklun states, or Ratik holding off the humanoids, there's so many things I've thought about that either I've done and would like to do again with new people, I'd like to do a different way, or I've thought about and never done.

I'm sure people familiar with FR feel the same way. Perhaps they just want to have their own twist on it. (And, fwiw, while I do have Iuz, there is no Circle of Eight in my GH, so I understand the impulse).

Thank you. This is sort of what I was getting at: people run the Realms because it's easy. It's not a "special purpose" world with a unique hook -- it is by design an absolutely standard medieval high fantasy world that a DM can quickly pick up and run any adventure in. But if the DM is going to put in the work at writing his own NPCs (and, by necessity, rewriting lots of the history that the default NPCs have been involved in), then this virtue of ease is lost. If he's willing to do all that work, what about the Realms is worth preserving? What does the Realms have to distinguish it? When Corpsetaker said, "So why can't some of you just repopulate FR with your own NPC's?", he seemed to be implying that all of us should be playing the Realms, even if we have to put in some extra effort to make that setting work for our needs. It's as if we were complaining that SUVs get bad gas mileage, and he said, "So why can't you just buy an SUV and switch its engine with a more efficient one?" What's the point? Why can't we just drive something else?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Which is a real meta-complaint, as Earth will never be invaded and the heroes won't fail.

In fiction (including novels), sure. But that knowledge nukes the fun of the game for a lot of players. In-character, you have no reason to expect that Earth WON'T be invaded. But you do have this guy a few miles away who has staved off at least a half-dozen alien invasions already.

But, really, it could be said about any genre where a few plucky heroes stand against seeming impossible odds. How come the Enterprise doesn't call in half of Starfleet to come help? How come Riggs and Murtaugh never call for back-up? Why doesn't Angel call an entire army of slayers for assistance? Why doesn't MI:6 dispatch an entire squad of double-ohs to handle a problem? Or why Harry Potter didn't go right to Dumbledore with half his problems. Or even, why doesn't the plucky band of adventurers recruit every member of the town guard and local militia to come into the dungeon and zerg rush the cultists?

This is why it's a "transmedia" issue, so I think it gets close to the heart of things. In linear fiction such as movies and novels, none of that is much of an issue, especially when it's self-contained within the story - when the protagonists are supposed to be unique, exceptional characters whose adventures you passively absorb. But games have different requirements, different rules they should follow, and in D&D one of those rules is "your character can end permanently in an underwhelming way." None of those exceptional protagonists is allowed to do that by the rules of their media, but your PC's are, because they're game constructs, not fictional constructs, and so they have more freedom. And when those exceptional NPC's exist in your RPG, they bring with them assumptions from their other medium.

Put another way, the uber-NPC's were written as exceptional characters, but any PC ranger is a ranger in a world where Drizz'zt is already a ranger, any PC wizard is a wizard in a world where Elminster is already a wizard. And neither of those two yobbos is supposed to be what the story you're telling at your table is about, but they're also kind of impossible to avoid.

I think this is why I'm most likely, were any of my players to seek out these NPC's, to say frankly, "They don't exist."

How about Dragonlance?
The Heroes of the Lance pretty much stole the thunder for everyone following the War of the Lance.

Yep. I'm playing a DL game, and while I'm not familiar with the setting in much detail, I think in his telling, the War of the Lance never happened, so none of those exceptional narrative characters exist, so there's exactly ZERO chance of them doing anything that our party would have to pay attention to.

The Realms developed a lot of high level NPCs. Because there's a bajillion books written there. But not every NPC really has a place in the campaign setting. The novel line is its own entity, and you're not bound to include someone's novel protagonist any more than you're forced to include their plot.

It feels like you're working against the assumptions of the game as it's presented, though. There's stats for Elminster, and Drizz'zt is gonna fight demons with you this year, so WotC wants you to pay attention to their characters. The default is "Elminster switch is ON."

And, really, the characters are half the fun of the setting. Without them the Realms is a little less interesting. As seen by the 4e Realms where they jumped ahead 100 years to kill off all the human NPCs and then made Elminster unable to cast magic. It was just lacking personality.

That's also a problem - if the most interesting thing about your game setting has nothing to do with game elements, but you push them into the game anyway, they're going to be an awkward fit. Uber-NPC's are nearly always an awkward fit in your D&D games. If there's nothing interesting when they've left, then there's a big hole in the core of your setting because while it might be fun to read about brooding, rebellious badasses, and it might be fun to play as a brooding, rebellious badass, it's not fun to play as a character where the brooding, rebellious badass is clearly the exceptional protagonist of the world, and you're just scene decoration for it. If the most interesting thing about your game setting is novel characters, you've got a pretty weak game setting.

(I'm not sure that's 100% true about FR, but perhaps some folks do!)

 

[Jester David]

In fiction (including novels), sure. But that knowledge nukes the fun of the game for a lot of players. In-character, you have no reason to expect that Earth WON'T be invaded. But you do have this guy a few miles away who has staved off at least a half-dozen alien invasions already.

Well, at the start of Princes of Apocalypse, a few miles away might very well be a group of heroes who saved the Realms from Tiamat. Why not get them?
Or, as was brought up in a thread reviewing PotA, why doesn't the PCs immediately run off the Waterdeep and alert the lords and guards there of the cultists?

And, of course, no one really expects the bad guys to win. The world will never be destroyed because the PCs failed. Because who wants to rewrite their entire campaign setting to accommodate the problems of one TPK? Instead, you either move to a new setting (and the failure has no consequence) or someone else saves the day (and the failure has no consequence) or you just ignore the TPK.

Yeah, I'm sure in homegames some DMs will rewrite their world to accommodate the party wipe and failure. But, if you're making your own world and willing to do that much writing/work, then the existence of published settings and adventure paths is irrelevant. You're not likely to be using them.

This is why it's a "transmedia" issue, so I think it gets close to the heart of things. In linear fiction such as movies and novels, none of that is much of an issue, especially when it's self-contained within the story - when the protagonists are supposed to be unique, exceptional characters whose adventures you passively absorb. But games have different requirements, different rules they should follow, and in D&D one of those rules is "your character can end permanently in an underwhelming way." None of those exceptional protagonists is allowed to do that by the rules of their media, but your PC's are, because they're game constructs, not fictional constructs, and so they have more freedom. And when those exceptional NPC's exist in your RPG, they bring with them assumptions from their other medium.

Put another way, the uber-NPC's were written as exceptional characters, but any PC ranger is a ranger in a world where Drizz'zt is already a ranger, any PC wizard is a wizard in a world where Elminster is already a wizard. And neither of those two yobbos is supposed to be what the story you're telling at your table is about, but they're also kind of impossible to avoid.

I think this is why I'm most likely, were any of my players to seek out these NPC's, to say frankly, "They don't exist."

I'd say it's less a problem of transmedia and more a problem with persistent worlds with multiple narratives.

As mentioned above, any time you have multiple campaigns in the same setting there's the lingering question about what the other PCs are doing. Or if one of the current heroes dies in that permanent yet underwhelming way, suddenly a new hero who has no established deeds to their name will appear who's exactly the right level to help contribute with those threads. Which is a problem other media doesn't have to deal with and is much weirder and more problematic than a high level hero not getting involved. Because, why was this lone adventurer not involved earlier?

How unique and exceptional adventurers are really varies from setting to setting and campaign to campaign. In the Realms, adventurers aren't really all *that* unique. But there'll always be enough. If you want rarer adventurers or a world where the PCs are the *only* heroes, then that's cool. There are other settings that do that (Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Eberron, Greyhawk, pretty much all the others really except for DL and FR...). But for people who don't want that tone, who want a cast of characters they can use, it's nice to have an alternative.

And, really, the difference between "they don't exist" and "they're busy with their own stuff" is cosmetic. However, if you want the high level NPCs then it's handy to have them. Sometimes it's fun to drop in the Name character and have the player's react to them. Like meeting Darth Vader or Han Solo in a Star Wars campaign.

It feels like you're working against the assumptions of the game as it's presented, though. There's stats for Elminster, and Drizz'zt is gonna fight demons with you this year, so WotC wants you to pay attention to their characters. The default is "Elminster switch is ON."

How dare WotC use some of their most recognizable intellectual property!

It's not like there are dozens of adventures featuring the characters. It's not like they launched the edition featuring those characters or every adventure to date has included them. If every adventure moving forward has the PCs working for Drizzt and/or Elminsters I'll complain and call foul. But as a one-off it's not a big deal. And it should be pretty darn effortless to rename and reflavour if you don't like the character.

That's also a problem - if the most interesting thing about your game setting has nothing to do with game elements, but you push them into the game anyway, they're going to be an awkward fit. Uber-NPC's are nearly always an awkward fit in your D&D games. If there's nothing interesting when they've left, then there's a big hole in the core of your setting because while it might be fun to read about brooding, rebellious badasses, and it might be fun to play as a brooding, rebellious badass, it's not fun to play as a character where the brooding, rebellious badass is clearly the exceptional protagonist of the world, and you're just scene decoration for it. If the most interesting thing about your game setting is novel characters, you've got a pretty weak game setting.

(I'm not sure that's 100% true about FR, but perhaps some folks do!)

It's not the most interesting thing, but it's an interesting thing. One of the strengths of the Realms is that the details are all there if you want to look for them, which includes NPCs and characters. If you don't want to make a hero then you don't have to make one.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In fiction (including novels), sure. But that knowledge nukes the fun of the game for a lot of players. In-character, you have no reason to expect that Earth WON'T be invaded. But you do have this guy a few miles away who has staved off at least a half-dozen alien invasions already.

yup...

This is why it's a "transmedia" issue, so I think it gets close to the heart of things. In linear fiction such as movies and novels, none of that is much of an issue, especially when it's self-contained within the story - when the protagonists are supposed to be unique, exceptional characters whose adventures you passively absorb. But games have different requirements, different rules they should follow, and in D&D one of those rules is "your character can end permanently in an underwhelming way." None of those exceptional protagonists is allowed to do that by the rules of their media, but your PC's are, because they're game constructs, not fictional constructs, and so they have more freedom. And when those exceptional NPC's exist in your RPG, they bring with them assumptions from their other medium.

and all you need to do is ask any heroes season 1 fans hated the other seasons...
90% of the cast: "Hey I have a problem, one I could use help with... well gotta go it alone"
90% of TV watchers: "USE YOUR DAMN CELL... CALL ANOTHER CHARACTER...LIKE THE FLIER OR TELEPORTER..."

Put another way, the uber-NPC's were written as exceptional characters, but any PC ranger is a ranger in a world where Drizz'zt is already a ranger, any PC wizard is a wizard in a world where Elminster is already a wizard. And neither of those two yobbos is supposed to be what the story you're telling at your table is about, but they're also kind of impossible to avoid.

it didn't need to be a problem. If way back in the day (ill go 2e just because it is where I came in) they made elminster a 9th level wizard with the chosen of mystra added on, maybe some exceptional stats, it would have been fine. He is A wizard, one you could be equal to or even greater then, but even he needs help...

same line of thought, make Drizt 5th or 6th level...


but instead we got epic 30th level archmage....

I think this is why I'm most likely, were any of my players to seek out these NPC's, to say frankly, "They don't exist."

It feels like you're working against the assumptions of the game as it's presented, though. There's stats for Elminster, and Drizz'zt is gonna fight demons with you this year, so WotC wants you to pay attention to their characters. The default is "Elminster switch is ON."

yup...

 

[Hussar]

let me take a shot at this... I CAN fix everything I don't like about the realms, but by that point it is so different that I can't really call it a realms game... so I might at well put a tad more work and just make my own.

I even suggested a group project with WotC to make a tiered down realms that would be more general acceptable, based on the same idea as "ultimate marvel"

Really? FR without Elminister isn't FR anymore? How canon-nazi are your players? It's not like Elminister is involved in 90% of the FR stories anyway. Sure, he's involved in some, but, as was mentioned upthread, there are something close to 300 FR novels, and only about 40 features Elminister and Drizz't combined. That's still over 200 novels that don't include either character.

And no one seems to bitch about Cadderly or Manshoon. So, it's obviously pretty possible to run an FR story without either of the two big names. Even something like the Baldur's Gate games, while they do feature cameo's, don't have the big two stepping in in any real way. Elminister is basically plot exposition and Drizz't appears once as a random encounter. There doesn't seem to be any problems there. Very popular storyline, accepted as canon by fans.

So, it's not like it can't be done.

I'll admit to not running FR campaigns, not because of dislike, but, mostly because I haven't run published settings most of the time. But, I've certainly borrowed from FR liberally. Some of the best D&D supplements have been in the FR line. Complaints about Mary Sue characters or over-powered NPC's seem a lot more like after the fact justifications than real complaints considering that virtually every D&D setting has shopping lists of Mary Sue characters. Bitching about Elminister but then accepting the Lady of Pain seems rather... near sighted to me. Or the Powers in Ravenloft. Or actual Powers in Mystara (a setting where it's actually possible for your NPC's and PC's to be gods).

It honestly looks more like complaints about something just because it's popular. It's "hip" to hate Elminister. It's Geek Cool to bag on Drizz't. In a setting where you have tens of thousands of pages of details - an entire Encyclopedia Britannica level of detail about the setting, getting fixated on two characters seems a bit myopic.