D&D 5E 5e isn't a Golden Age of D&D Lorewise, it's Silver at best.

[Henadic Theologian]

Maps are maps. A detailed and high-quality map is always a good thing, but they don't count as lore. They're just maps.

Monster stat blocks are a part of many campaign setting products, but they don't count as lore. They're mechanics. It would be valid to complain that the SCAG doesn't have monster stat blocks for Sword Coast-specific/centric monsters, but it would be weird to say "the lore in the SCAG is so bad! They don't even have monster stats for the Phaerimm!"

Maps are a medium in which lore can be expressed, especially when geography and nations and so on are radically transformed by a cataclysmic event like the Sundering where cities and nations got shifted between worlds and the land itself was straight up expanded by AO.

Plus with a good key with the map it can show you demographics, key imports/exports, the locations of adventures sites and magical wonders, which cities are capitals and where the borders are between nations, where particular pantheons hold dominions, and so much more.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yes, they can contain a ton of info, condensed, such as cities and depending on the map key a ton of other stuff.

Maps are a medium in which lore can be expressed, especially when geography and nations and so on are radically transformed by a cataclysmic event like the Sundering where cities and nations got shifted between worlds and the land itself was straight up expanded by AO.

Plus with a good key with the map it can show you demographics, key imports/exports, the locations of adventures sites and magical wonders, which cities are capitals and where the borders are between nations, where particular pantheons hold dominions, and so much more.

Telling you that a city exists and where it is is not "lore". It's a map.

"Maps are a medium in which lore can be expressed". Sure. So are stat blocks for monsters. Medusa having snake eyes that petrify people that they look at is lore. The stat block that makes that possible is an expression of the lore. But something being an expression of the lore doesn't mean that it itself is lore.

Maps aren't lore. If you want a full map of the Forgotten Realms in 5e, I'm not arguing against that. But complaining about there not being one isn't a lore complaint, and I just thought it was really weird to act like it is one.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Telling you that a city exists and where it is is not "lore". It's a map.

"Maps are a medium in which lore can be expressed". Sure. So are stat blocks for monsters. Medusa having snake eyes that petrify people that they look at is lore. The stat block that makes that possible is an expression of the lore. But something being an expression of the lore doesn't mean that it itself is lore.

Maps aren't lore. If you want a full map of the Forgotten Realms in 5e, I'm not arguing against that. But complaining about there not being one isn't a lore complaint, and I just thought it was really weird to act like it is one.

It's is because a map carries vital lore, so it's a package deal.

 

[HaroldTheHobbit]

I really gotta ask though. How much lore is needed? Forgotten Realms has THREE HUNDRED novels. Dozens of video games. Dozens of modules - and if you include Living FR and organized play, probably hundreds of modules. More than a hundred official published setting books. That's not counting Dragon, Dungeon, WotC website, Candlekeep forums, and the bajillion 3rd party stuff on DM's Guild.

Good grief, how could you possibly even begin to scratch the surface of that? We're looking at tens of thousands of pages of material here spread out over decades, none of it cross referenced and most of it without even the beginnings of an index.

And people want MORE material? Are you serious?

Yes. Good lore isn't static, it evolves with the editions. And the evolving lore is something that for me is very enjoyable in itself, at this point a 50 year old meta story evolution that you can disregard or adapt to your own game to taste.

As I wrote, I can live with a D&D without lore or lore evolution, it just takes away a - for me - very enjoyable dimension.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Could Ravenloft have been longer? Probably. But the designers didn't feel like expanding it out any further. Some got annoyed with Xanathar's for having 26 pages of name tables (which I enjoyed, and apparently WotC received good feedback on that feature), would 16 pages of Gothic name tables be an improvement? Depends on who you ask.

Just want to pipe up that I absolutely love the name tables in Xanathar’s. It is one of the sections that I use the most.

 

[FrozenNorth]

That's a very American attitude, but it's not one that flies in Europe, I should note, which I guess is why Americans insist we're all "socialists" lol.

At the risk of picking at a sore spot, I thought the British wren’t European any more?

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Yes. Good lore isn't static, it evolves with the editions. And the evolving lore is something that for me is very enjoyable in itself, at this point a 50 year old meta story evolution that you can disregard or adapt to your own game to taste.

As I wrote, I can live with a D&D without lore or lore evolution, it just takes away a - for me - very enjoyable dimension.

Well said. The same is true for me as well. Thankfully I believe we will get an FR Campaign Setting book in 2024 for 5.5e.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm not convinced that the Forgotten Realms is popular because people like it more than other settings, I'm more convinced that it's popular because it keeps getting used as the core setting and there are so many products supporting it.

The AD&D sales history recently coming to light suggests that, indeed, people liked Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms more than other Settings. It is a feedback loop, because it gets more chances when it gets published more.often, but WotC keeps publishing it because it sells better. It's bith/and at the same time.

And it is pretty easy to get into the FR casually.

 

[Maxperson]

I would agree with that. The sales numbers for OG Spelljammer make it an odd choice for a reboot, but I remain kind of excited to see what they do with it.

I think the sales numbers don't really show its popularity. Spelljammer came out when 2e was failing(1990 is when everything started to really dive) and a lot of its popularity has come over the decades since as more and more people were exposed to the idea and saw what it did.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the sales numbers don't really show its popularity. Spelljammer came out when 2e was failing(1990 is when everything started to really dive) and a lot of its popularity has come over the decades since as more and more people were exposed to the idea and saw what it did.

2e came out in 1989. Are you saying it started to fail less than one year into release?