Campaign setting recommendations

[Desdichado]

The generalizations aren't that broad and the innacurracies aren't that... er, innacurate. You're assertions about the "facts" of FR are all opinion based. I specifically mentioned the mishmash of cultural elements being one of FR's weakest points early, early on in this thread (still unanswered -- I'd like to see someone who knows a thing or two about cultural anthropology or history actually try and justify that one.) Throwing up one example of a desert origin story doesn't invalidate the other weather patter/continent design issues with FR (although personally, I'm not terribly bothered by that one.)

This isn't a case of pitting FR against Kalamar, it's a case of examining the content of each and matching the one to your taste that most aligns with it. In my case, clearly I find Kalamar a better setting for many of the same reasons arcady mentioned above.

 

[Mystery Man]

The Fires of heaven by Robert Jordan is by far the worst piece of fiction that I have read in my entire life and has ruined my enjoyment of his series, The Wheel of Time.

I made it to book IV before saying enough is enough after reading the same recycled plot, girls against boys, slowly going made (go mad already!),....stuff.

Besides, this thread is about Kalamar vs. FR. Mention of any other setting is in my opinion off topic.

Way off topic, but hey its fun.

 

[Desdichado]

Besides, this thread is about Kalamar vs. FR. Mention of any other setting is in my opinion off topic.

So?

 

[Mystery Man]

You're assertions about the "facts" of FR are all opinion based.

Dude, facts are in the book. Books at home but I can dig them up for you later.

This isn't a case of pitting FR against Kalamar, .

Of course it isn't, that would be silly.

it's a case of examining the content of each and matching the one to your taste that most aligns with it. In my case, clearly I find Kalamar a better setting for many of the same reasons arcady mentioned above

You are exactly right. I requote myself "As usual when you try to pit on setting against another there is no winner or loser, both settings are equally good. "

 

[Kichwas]

You are exactly right. I requote myself "As usual when you try to pit on setting against another there is no winner or loser, both settings are equally good. "

That's such a 'politically correct' answer.

Sometimes, things do have solid, concrete flaws in them. Not everything and in fact nothing is truly equal.

 

[Mystery Man]

That's such a 'politically correct' answer.

Sometimes, things do have solid, concrete flaws in them. Not everything and in fact nothing is truly equal.

I'm glad you found at least one statement you could attack.

<--see I can do that too.

 

[Mystery Man]

I specifically mentioned the mishmash of cultural elements being one of FR's weakest points early, early on in this thread (still unanswered -- I'd like to see someone who knows a thing or two about cultural anthropology or history actually try and justify that one.) Throwing up one example of a desert origin story doesn't invalidate the other weather patter/continent design issues with FR (although personally, I'm not terribly bothered by that one.)

One semester of Anthroplogy ten years ago is all I have to go on, but even then when I was playing the Realms did I once even care? No.

What kills me is that these are fantasy settings. Why do they have to "anthropologically correct" down to the last evolutionary element?

 

[Desdichado]

One semester of Anthroplogy ten years ago is all I have to go on, but even then when I was playing the Realms did I once even care? No.

What kills me is that these are fantasy settings. Why do they have to "anthropologically correct" down to the last evolutionary element?

I'm not talking about anthropologically correct down to the last evolutionary element. I'm talking about something not as blatantly transparent as taking easily recognizable earth cultures (Mulhorand = Egypt, the Horde = Mongols, to name just a couple) separated in real life by thousands of years (and miles) and tossing them willy-nilly into a setting. Sure, in a fantasy setting, that could happen, but at the same time, it smacks of laziness. Those of us who actually have some interest in history are turned off by that kind of sloppy creation.

Another problem I have with FR that I can't really shake, is the history of the setting itself. I think 3e FR is the best it's ever been, and I've gladly picked up the book to "borrow" from liberally. However, over the last several years that the setting has been in print, and the millions of gamers who have devoured FR novel after FR novel, it's very difficult to divorce the setting from my own personal history with the Realms, regardless of what it's actually like in its current incarnation.

 

[Desdichado]

Sometimes, things do have solid, concrete flaws in them. Not everything and in fact nothing is truly equal.

Those are flaws of perception as much as actual flaws, though. Folks who couldn't give a flying fig for continental climatology likely don't find the arrangement of Faerun to be a flaw in the least. For example.

 

[Mystery Man]

I'm not talking about anthropologically correct down to the last evolutionary element. I'm talking about something not as blatantly transparent as taking easily recognizable earth cultures (Mulhorand = Egypt, the Horde = Mongols, to name just a couple) separated in real life by thousands of years (and miles) and tossing them willy-nilly into a setting. Sure, in a fantasy setting, that could happen, but at the same time, it smacks of laziness. Those of us who actually have some interest in history are turned off by that kind of sloppy creation.

Kalamar = Rome
Brandobia = France?
Wild Lands = Vikings
Reanarea Bay = Italy
Young Kindoms = England


Whats your point again?