D&D 5E The case for (and against) a new Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book

[Urriak Uruk]

Page counts aren't the best metric to go by. If you compare the font sizes used in the two books, you'll see that there are significantly more words per page in the FRCS than there are in the SCAG.

Fair point.

Looking back at a copy of the 3E FRCS... do people seriously want this geography section reprinted, with a handful of changes to see "what it looks like in the year 5E is set in"? From what I've seen most of these places aren't that different in the timeline of 5E.

 

[teitan]

s this a joke? You're paying for the adventure AND the setting material. If you only plan on using one, you're the fiscally irresponsible one.



Look, people disagree with your arguments. Doesn't mean you should be rude

No it’s not a joke, it’s, that in spite of me saying repeatedly, that telling people to buy an adventure for scant setting materials is wrong. Telling them to eat 40 bucks for what amounted to a $10-14 book 6 years ago is wrong. Telling people that If they want to run their own Underdark campaign to go buy Out of the Abyss is wrong. I’m advocating for the reintroduction of tool kits like an Underdark sourcebook rather than telling people to buy an adventure and eat a crap sandwich and smile even if they don’t want to necessarily run Out of the Abyss or Storm Kings Thunder etc.

Like I’ve said repeatedly in this thread, half a decade ago we wouldn’t be telling people things like that. We would have been looking at page counts and how useable the material in the book was for a home brew in a page count to cost ration and there would have been pitch forks and torches.

I don’t blame WOTC. They clearly are doing something right but they aren’t telling fans “if you want to run your own Underdark campaign then buy Out of the Abyss and suck it if you don’t use 75% of the material” because they aren’t selling them as sourcebooks but as adventures and stories. It’s only a small contingent of fans that are telling people to suck it up, RPGs are a premium hobby, and to use these things as sourcebooks and that is NOT WOTC intent either!

 

[Parmandur]

No it’s not a joke, it’s, that in spite of me saying repeatedly, that telling people to buy an adventure for scant setting materials is wrong. Telling them to eat 40 bucks for what amounted to a $10-14 book 6 years ago is wrong. Telling people that If they want to run their own Underdark campaign to go buy Out of the Abyss is wrong. I’m advocating for the reintroduction of tool kits like an Underdark sourcebook rather than telling people to buy an adventure and eat a crap sandwich and smile even if they don’t want to necessarily run Out of the Abyss or Storm Kings Thunder etc.

Like I’ve said repeatedly in this thread, half a decade ago we wouldn’t be telling people things like that. We would have been looking at page counts and how useable the material in the book was for a home brew in a page count to cost ration and there would have been pitch forks and torches.

I don’t blame WOTC. They clearly are doing something right but they aren’t telling fans “if you want to run your own Underdark campaign then buy Out of the Abyss and suck it if you don’t use 75% of the material” because they aren’t selling them as sourcebooks but as adventures and stories. It’s only a small contingent of fans that are telling people to suck it up, RPGs are a premium hobby, and to use these things as sourcebooks and that is NOT WOTC intent either!

No, WotC is marketing those books as generally useable and mineable toolkits. Fairly aggressively, and correctly.

If someone wants to run an Underdark campaign, Out of the Abyss is a useful toolkit resource, and is a better deal than pure toolkits WotC was selling in the 3.x era just on the grounds of toolkit material.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Fair point.

Looking back at a copy of the 3E FRCS... do people seriously want this geography section reprinted, with a handful of changes to see "what it looks like in the year 5E is set in"? From what I've seen most of these places aren't that different in the timeline of 5E.

It honestly seems like people want their old campaign books to be obsolete and be forced to buy new things.

Which is odd, because if that happened in literally any other business, the company that did it would be set on fire.

 

[Parmandur]

It honestly seems like people want their old campaign books to be obsolete and be forced to buy new things.

Which is odd, because if that happened in literally any other business, the company that did it would be set on fire.

I mean, WotC is offering the older complete FR products on PDF and POD. And I can verify the 3E FRCS works fine with 5E.

 

[teitan]

Fair point.

Looking back at a copy of the 3E FRCS... do people seriously want this geography section reprinted, with a handful of changes to see "what it looks like in the year 5E is set in"? From what I've seen most of these places aren't that different in the timeline of 5E.

Considering it’s been 100+ years sure but I think it’s a good idea due to rising costs of OOP copies. I recently bought an FRCS again, no map. Paid about 30 for it but with the map intact it’s more and still attached map it goes much higher. This is a slightly beat up copy, corners are showing cardboard pushing through, marks on the cover. There are plot hooks in the book that have been long resolved. The art could use an update. Plus it’s a twenty year old book! There are cool spells and prestige classes in that could use a good update. Plus much of the info isn’t readily available on book store shelves anymore. Sure the SCAG gives a blurb about Thay but let’s ask a question...

If all you have is the SCAG, the Sword Coast... does it really sell you on the Realms to have JUST a medieval Europe? Inclusion is important these days and really every setting for D&D 5e is a variation on medieval Europe so far as presentation goes but in the Realms, and even discounting the side settings like Al Qadim etc, in the core Realms you have a very broad range of cultures including Arabic, Sumerian, Asian, Egyptian, African plus the race regions such as Evermeet, the Dwarf kingdoms in the Great Rift, halflings in Luiren. I think that representation, contained in the core of the Realms since 1e, has been a core reason for its continuing best seller status since it launched. While the SCAG sells well as people love to chant, it doesn’t reflect that diversity except in the most shallow way By glossing over cultures and locations outside of the Sword Coast. As a Sword Coast book it’s great. As a Realms book? As most seem to have agreed since it came out its weak in that regard. Personally love mine and most of my campaigns have been in that region or the Dalelands since 3e. I ran a short one in Thay back in 2003 or so. But I really think that WOTC is missing out by not banking on the strength of the Realms and focusing on a single region.

Other settings, Dragonlance for example, is very much a Wagnerian Germany with hints of Native American culture. A Mormon inspired fantasy adventure. Dark Sun is a niche as well. Ravenloft was always about Barovia. Birthright is very Germanic also. Mystara is the closest in scope to the Realms and fills a lot of the same holes in different ways. Greyhawk is very Lieberian sword & sorcery, Conan adventure and aside from Hepmonoland focused very on a European setting. Ebberon is Europe after the First World War. All are brilliant settings but limited in scope aside from Mystara.

 

[teitan]

It honestly seems like people want their old campaign books to be obsolete and be forced to buy new things.

Which is odd, because if that happened in literally any other business, the company that did it would be set on fire.

Except software companies. And they are kind of obsolete. One of the things that helped push RPGs and the Realms especially is the metaplot. It was a core thing. It’s been 100 years. I know Vangerdahast is no longer the leading mate of Cormyr. It’s like handing someone a history book that ends in 1920 and telling them it’s enough to know what’s going on today.

 

[Parmandur]

Personally love mine and most of my campaigns have been in that region or the Dalelands since 3e. I ran a short one in Thay back in 2003 or so. But I really think that WOTC is missing out by not banking on the strength of the Realms and focusing on a single region.

Maybe, but if more tables than not resemble yours (and the evidence suggests that is the case)...maybe they are just offering something focused on what people use?

 

[Mecheon]

One of the things that helped push RPGs and the Realms especially is the metaplot. It was a core thing

That was back then, this is now. Eberron specifically doesn't have meta-plot, 4E Dark Sun was well regarded for ignoring the metaplot and bringing things backwards..

Metaplots are not the big draw they are today than they were in the past

 

[teitan]

That was back then, this is now. Eberron specifically doesn't have meta-plot, 4E Dark Sun was well regarded for ignoring the metaplot and bringing things backwards..

Metaplots are not the big draw they are today than they were in the past

I didn’t say they were but in the case of the Realms current set up it was driven by metaplot that hasn’t been clear really up until a couple years ago. Plus the adventures DO have a metaplot in that they take place in different years and have a continuity layer to them. There is a timeline of the Realms that is moving forward and it’s been about five years I think added to the timeline since 5e launched. Eberron never had a metaplot going on and Dark Sun was previously ruined by its metaplot so dialing those back makes sense but they’ve continued pushing forward on the Realms timeline and developments. An NPC from Princes of the Apocalypse appears in Dragon Heist trying to redeem herself for example. So your point is invalidated in this example.