D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[Lanefan]

Personally I don't see anyone coming out of the army with any levels. I don't think you gain levels until you say "I am going to become a PC." But then I guess I didn't come up in the 3e era where everyone had levels.

Here I have to kinda disagree on principle, in that while I'm not real big on 3e's idea of everyone having levels (5th-level commoner just doesn't do it for me, sorry) I do believe that anyone in the game world who does things that would normally accrue xp to a played character should get those xp notwithstanding.

Obviously this is all "off-screen" and no DM is expected to track the xp totals of every soldier or pickpocket or lab mage...but those people can still gain levels, albeit at a much slower pace than the average adventurer.

So, if you do a tour of duty in the Queen's army you might come out as a 0th-level fighter (you did your basic training but by sheer luck never happened to see any action), or as a very low (1st or 2nd) level fighter (you stuck it out for a while, got into some battles and survived), or even as a slightly higher level (3rd-5th) level fighter (you put in a lot of years, saw a lot of action and did some risky or heroic things whether by choice or necessity, survived, maybe got a field promotion or two).

Similar examples can be drawn for most other classes.

Lanefan

 

[MackMcMacky]

I don't know. I have no idea what you like. I gave a pretty detailed example from my current campaign a few pages ago that explained what I chose to use and what I ignored and why. That post went largely ignored, so I'm not going to go into all that detail again.

What's cool about any setting other than the high level NPCs? I'm sure that the FR has stuff that you'd dig, just like Krynn may, or Oerth, or Mystara. When we're talking about these "kitchen sink/Tolkienesque" settings, it boils down to a matter of preference based on which setting has the most elements that appeal to an individual.

I personally like the idea of separate cuty states loosely affiliated for common interest, but separated by distance and wild territory. I like the Empire of Shade. I like Sembia, a nation of roguish, self serving merchant houses. I like the untamed jungles of Chult.

None of these things is necessarily uniquely original or specific to the FR. But neither are the elements of the other settibga I mentioned. They're all just as generic or easily moved to another setting as any of the FR elements.

But regardless if setting, if I as the DM choose to have NPCs swoop in and save the day, or even just assist the PCs, and my players fon't dig that, then I have erred as a DM and shouldn't blame it on the setting.

I don't know anything about an Empire of Shade. Chult feels like any other jungle setting to me. The execution on Sembia, etc. I found lacking when I was considering running Forgotten Realms. I looked at the map and where the trade was and the roads and everything and it felt like a mess that didn't really make much sense to work the way it did. The FRealms felt somewhat anachronistic in execution.

 

[MackMcMacky]

All of the countries and their histories are what is distinctive about the Realms. The powerful NPCs are not what make it distinctive. They're nothing more than names. Elminster is the same as Raistlin who is the same as Mordenkainen, and so on. Powerful wizard again?!?!? Nothing distinctive about that.

I can see the Raistlin/Elminster comparison but not the Mordenkainen one. Mordenkainen wasn't killing gods, making love to gods, etc.

As far as the countries and their histories, I dislike the execution in FRealms. It read like some guys who don't know history just tossing stuff together. Gygax's short treatment of the history of the Flanaess feels much more like an old-fashioned myth/history. The FRealms socio-political dynamics are wonky. If you don't sit around and read history books for fun and work it's probably easier to overlook.

 

[MackMcMacky]

I love the deep and rich history of the setting (I mean, after all, what other setting could have 160-page book dedicated to just its bare-bones chronology alone, based on already written material? A full-fledged history would take up a bookshelf!); 40,000+ years of history as a rich and colorful tapestry background. I love the varied and interesting nations and cultures of the setting, and how they interact. I love the depth of the descriptions of its settlements and other sites; descriptions so deep in detail that it is incredibly evocative when it comes to the theater of the mind. Once one goes down the rabbit hole and reads up as much as possible on the setting, even just based on game accessories alone and ignoring the novels, it can at times almost feel like you're there, such is the depth of description...

Based on the short version of FRealms history I am familiar with it makes me think I would just find pages and pages of stuff I would find annoying and want to ignore. If you like it, great. All signs point to me not liking all those details based on the details I already know.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Please show me where Elminster is depicted as a "notorious busybody who gets into everyone's business". (And not a Dragon Magazine article)

In an actual FR supplement or other official source.

Because I remember him as a guy who only gets involved in major events, and even then he usually sends other people.

Well, me personally? Not even close. I've never read a single FR Supplement other than the SCAG. I'm too young for them.

However, from anecdotal discussions I've been told he is a busybody, now that may be untrue or an exaggeration, but that is how he has always been described to me.

So you were intentionally ignoring context. You know very well that the context of this discussion limited NPCs to mortals such as Elminster and Dalamar.

Isn't Elminster the Chosen of a Deity, and doesn't that mean that she basically handed him a bunch of power?

So... what context does Elminster's power coming from a deity get ignored?

I mean, you're the one who made such a broad statement about NPCs, for me that includes gods, angels, spirits, demon lords. If it is not a PC then it is a NPC. If a NPC is granted levels by a god, then that is within the context of mortals.

Please don't claim me willfully ignorant when you are the one making the broad statements I'm responding to.

Wow, if you only you'd been there to tell me how to run all the NPC's in my campaigns over the last 30 years.

With sterling advice like: all of them "love to get into other people's business and probably will attempt to involve themselves in any big plots". That's top notch stuff right there.

It's just too bad you weren't there to ruin my games for me. I don't know how I made it through.

What are you seeing here that I'm not that is leading you to be so rude and dismissive. He didn't say that was the way it should be, he didn't say that was the best way it could be, he didn't even say it was the way he runs it himself.

He said that was the way they are by "by their canon characterizations" meaning the way they have been written by DnD writers. It is stupid with a good possibility to ruin the game, that is why the advice people keep giving is "ignore how they are supposed to be because it will ruin your game"

 

[Caliban]

Well, me personally? Not even close. I've never read a single FR Supplement other than the SCAG. I'm too young for them.

However, from anecdotal discussions I've been told he is a busybody, now that may be untrue or an exaggeration, but that is how he has always been described to me.

It's a common exaggeration, because in the original campaign run by Ed Greenwood, Elminster was the DM's mouthpiece to the characters, the one that knew everything and sent them on adventures.

Then Ed wrote a lot of Dragon Magazine article from the point of view of Elminster, and there were few books that detailed his life where he was more active - because he was the main character of a book and it was about his adventures.

But in actual adventures and FR setting material, Elminster doesn't go around getting up in everyone's business. That is is solely in the realm of fanboy DM's and exaggerated stories told by people tired of hearing his name.

It's the same reason people hate Drizz't - not for anything he did in the books, but because of how other people used the character.

What are you seeing here that I'm not that is leading you to be so rude and dismissive. He didn't say that was the way it should be, he didn't say that was the best way it could be, he didn't even say it was the way he runs it himself.

Then you haven't been reading his posts. He's been patronizing and condescending since the first one.

He said that was the way they are by "by their canon characterizations" meaning the way they have been written by DnD writers. It is stupid with a good possibility to ruin the game, that is why the advice people keep giving is "ignore how they are supposed to be because it will ruin your game"

No, he flat out told me I had run them wrong in my own game. Following it up with "it's OK, you were right to run them the wrong way".

Someone telling me I "did it wrong, but that's OK, you tried your best" 20 years after the fact is not something I appreciate. And then telling me "here's how they actually act" as if I was an ignorant newcomer asking for his sage advice? He can get bent.

Besides which, ascribing the exactly the same character attribute (interfering busybody) to all the high level realms NPC's and claiming it is canon is just plain stupid.

 

[KahlessNestor]

Gods are NPCs though, and the fact that you accept they can gain levels by simply gaining power finishes the point I was trying to make.

You said : "I prefer to play in a rational world, not one where people just pop in at 16th or 27th level. They all adventured and gained experience though another similar method, or they would be first level."

However, that is not always the case. There are times when simply being gifted with enough power translates into character levels. So, a small child who gains a fragment of a gods power could be statted as a leveled character despite having never gone on a single adventure. And it is still rational, following the rules of the world, if not neccesarily the rules for normal mortals.







They were talking about an Eberron priestess who is "stuck" in her temple because she is a level 20 character in the temple, but only level 3 outside of it. That idea of someone whose level and power varies according to the location is not one I have thought to put in DnD before.







I think you are misreading the spirit of the comment.
[MENTION=6812658]Seramus[/MENTION] is saying that depicting Elminster (who is a notorious busybody who gets into everyone's business) as someone who can't be bothered to get involved in your characters business is kind of like depicting Zeus as someone who respects women. It goes against the normal expectations of that character.

And you can claim "my fictional character my fictional rules for how he acts" and I'm sure we can find all sorts of fan fiction which claims the same thing and no one would agree it was an actual depiction of the original character.

I'm trying to think of a single time Elminster has poked his nose into Drizzt's business. So far as I've read the novels (through Gauntlegrym?) he hasn't. Does he poke his nose into Farideh's business (haven't read those yet)?

Elminster seems to stick to his own books/adventures. He may be a busybody, but he seems to stick to his own part of Faerun. And there's always the fact he could be out planshopping, or dealing with some other situation elsewhere. Or maybe he ate some bad sushi and is home hugging the privy.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

[Maxperson]

I can see the Raistlin/Elminster comparison but not the Mordenkainen one. Mordenkainen wasn't killing gods, making love to gods, etc.

Super powerful wizard is super powerful wizard is super powerful wizard. Just because Mordenkainen didn't have direct dealings with gods doesn't mean that he's not a super famous, super powerful, super influential wizard on par with the others.

As far as the countries and their histories, I dislike the execution in FRealms. It read like some guys who don't know history just tossing stuff together. Gygax's short treatment of the history of the Flanaess feels much more like an old-fashioned myth/history. The FRealms socio-political dynamics are wonky. If you don't sit around and read history books for fun and work it's probably easier to overlook.

That's valid. I personally like it, but I know that it's not everyone's cup of tea.

 

[Demetrios1453]

No, he flat out told me I had run them wrong in my own game. Following it up with "it's OK, you were right to run them the wrong way".

Someone telling me I "did it wrong, but that's OK, you tried your best" 20 years after the fact is not something I appreciate. And then telling "here's how they actually act" as if I was an ignorant newcomer asking for his sage advice? He can get bent.

That's something I was just thinking about myself - there are a lot of posts in this thread implying (and sometimes outright saying!) that DMs who run the Realms but don't have high-level NPCs as a continual presence in their game are basically running their games wrong, which kind of goes against basic gaming etiquette...

 

[Maxperson]

]Isn't Elminster the Chosen of a Deity, and doesn't that mean that she basically handed him a bunch of power?

It's a template no different from say being a half-celestial as a race. It has zero, zip, nada, zilch, nothing to do with his class levels.

So... what context does Elminster's power coming from a deity get ignored?

In the context of it being irrelevant to the discussion of NPCs with lots of class levels. We're discussing mortal NCPs, not gods. The instant you try to bring gods into this, every PC in every official setting is overshadowed. Dark Sun had lots of super high level NPCs, so...

I mean, you're the one who made such a broad statement about NPCs, for me that includes gods, angels, spirits, demon lords. If it is not a PC then it is a NPC. If a NPC is granted levels by a god, then that is within the context of mortals.

I made it the context of the discussion which has purely been about high level NPC mortals. Context, it helps if you learn how to recognize it.