D&D 5E Do you want a Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide?

Do you want a Forgotten Reapms Campaign Guide?

  • Yes

    Votes: 54 36.7%
  • No

    Votes: 66 44.9%
  • I'm not a Forgotten Realms fan, but I don't object to it

    Votes: 27 18.4%

Is because I want to not enough?

Because you want to is a fine reason. Just don't mistake want and need as some people in this thread are doing. You want a FRCS book. Cool. I want CS books for Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Eberron, Planescape, and at least one totally new setting. But you won't see me claiming that I don't have what I need to play Ravenloft or Planescape (I have what I need for those). For Spelljammer we could definitely use good naval combat rules and ship layouts (I looked for the Spelljammer boxed set on the DMs guild and couldn't find it, otherwise we'd already have the ship layouts). For Eberron, we need the artificer.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Hence the WANT for one. Want is not need. You have everything you NEED to play in FR. Just as I have everything I NEED to play in Ravenloft. By way of contrast, artificers and warforged are so much a part of Eberron that we do not have have what we NEED to play there.

You can just convert it to 5e, see you have what you need.
 

You can just convert it to 5e, see you have what you need.

There is a difference between mechanics and fluff. Fluff is usable as is regardless of edition. Heck, fluff is usable regardless of game. With the previous edition setting materials I have, I could run a BtVS game in Barovia (Strahd meets the Slayer? Not a terrible concept), or a Palladium Fantasy RPG game in FR.
 


Hence the WANT for one. Want is not need. You have everything you NEED to play in FR. Just as I have everything I NEED to play in Ravenloft. By way of contrast, artificers and warforged are so much a part of Eberron that we do not have have what we NEED to play there.

Since we are supposed to use the old versions of the lore then maybe we should just use the old version of the rules? We dont NEED to use the latest version of the rules to play there.
 

Since we are supposed to use the old versions of the lore then maybe we should just use the old version of the rules? We dont NEED to use the latest version of the rules to play there.

That's true, you don't. And, if you enjoy 3e or 4e (or 2e, etc.) more than 5e then you absolutely should play what you love more, because the world sucks, and in it there is too little time to force yourself to play something you don't enjoy.
 

That's true, you don't. And, if you enjoy 3e or 4e (or 2e, etc.) more than 5e then you absolutely should play what you love more, because the world sucks, and in it there is too little time to force yourself to play something you don't enjoy.

Too short to be stuck playing the same setting over and over like Groundhogs Day anyway.

Heh, Century of the Fruitbat....again.
 

What if you want to campaign outside the Sword Coast and the North, you simply don't have the intel to do so.

Well, first of all, that's what makes it a "good start" as I noted. Not just a good start for new players at this moment, but a good start to lead into future releases.

The pre-5e material covered (in quite a bit of detail) Baldur's Gate in Murder in Baldur's Gate and Daggerford in Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle and Scourge of the Sword Coast, and Icewind Dale in Legacy of the Crystal Shard. The first two APs covered a lot of ground geographically, but really didn't provide a lot of campaign material. PotA did, though, expanding on the material in the Basic Set and covering the Dessarin Valley. OotA covered the Underdark in the North, SCAG covered the Sword Coast and the north and SKT filled in a lot of the blanks remaining in the Savage Frontier.

There appears to be a very strong pattern here in the way they are presenting the material, and more importantly a sizeable focus on one region that pretty much provides and overview of the current state of that region, with NPCs, events, and where it stands after the Sundering and 4e. It's also more material (and more geographic ground) than probably most home-brew and even some published campaigns.

In the 3e FRCS the Geography portion covered 133 pages. SCAG is 44 pages, PotA 21, SKT 55, plus the additional material MiBG, GoDC, SotSC, and LotCS, even accounting for the larger font and more white space, that's a lot of material for just a single region with about the same page count as the same section in the FRCS for all of Faerun. Some of the History and the Organizations have been covered, along with the Deities. Although it's really non-edition-specific, I would consider Ed Greenwood Presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms as a core setting book for the 5e as well, which goes into much greater detail regarding life in the Realms. Add the Grand History of the Realms as another non-edition-specific core book, and you have a pretty respectable Realms collection already available for 5e. Is it as fast as earlier editions? Maybe not in geographic coverage, but for page count, number of adventures, etc., it's quite a bit (and may have already surpassed 4e?).

I think it also presents a sizable body of evidence that they are not likely to release a big campaign setting. There has also been surprisingly little duplication among those sources.

Instead, for those that want to campaign outside the Sword Coast you either have to go back to earlier editions (which is recommended even for the Sword Coast too), or be patient. If you look at the material so far, the Sword Coast has been pretty well covered in an every widening circle of what might be in a Campaign Guide. While there are certainly regions that could still be covered (one that makes sense would be a city adventure in Waterdeep), I think we're rapidly approaching the point where the APs will shift to another region of the Realms.

An AP set in Cormyr, the Heartlands, or Sembia would make sense to me. Heck an adventure that starts in Waterdeep and leads to Cormyr would be very cool as well. Of course, it's more likely an adventure in Waterdeep would lead to Undermountain...

Regardless, I think we'll see one or probably several APs set in another region of the Realms.

The focus is different than earlier editions. They've got a business plan that is centered around two APs each year, and those APs also include campaign information to some degree or another. In the last two years, they have also released a non-AP book - SCAG and VgtM. What's on the agenda for next year? Ravenloft Adventurer's Guide? Heartlands Adventurer's Guide? Another book of monsters, or a book of spells and magic items? Perhaps two non-AP books in addition to the two APs?

Another thing that is different (from my perspective anyway) is that they are focused on making things more accessible to a more casual gamer. The APs are designed for nearly the entire "playable" life of the characters, typical 1st to 15th level. In addition, the AP provides all of the campaign material needed for the DM to flesh things out, and add their own adventures in that region.

For the enthusiasts (like us), they provide pieces of the larger campaign, with a bunch of adventures/adventure sites that can easily be used outside of the APs if desired. Plus the newer non-AP books that provide additional support for those campaigns.

It's kind of a new approach to a campaign setting too. I loved the original Gray Box (a bit obvious I suppose, since I've been running in the Realms ever since). But it was a lot of material to get all at once. That's actually a common complaint I see about the Realms, that some DMs don't want to run games in the Realms because there is too much. Instead, they are approaching it in the opposite direction. Start with a small region and expand from there. Taking the world one piece at a time.

It's not what we're used to, and may not be exactly the way you like it. But it certainly looks like it's a business model that is working better for them than (apparently) any other they've used in the past.

The Realms specific stuff is selling well, and allows them to tie into video games, comics, novels (if they continue), and reportedly the D&D movie. The system appears to be heavily invested in the Realms. To me, it's not really a question of whether they'll do other regions, it's when.
 

Even though he's making a joke, Mirtek's point is important as to why a 5e FRCG is essential. Having bits of lore parced through various APs & SCAG still leaves too much up in the air for people that want to run their Realms game anywhere beyond the Sword Coast... or attempt to tie previous campaigns to the current timeline. If the time-jump to 5e was merely a decade instead of a century, I can see the 3e FRCG as being a viable resource for current games.

So I agree with most of this. What I disagree with at this stage is whether that requires a FRCS, particularly with the amount of material that has already been released.

The jump was really a matter of a couple of years, from 4e to 5e. It has already been stated (in SCAG) that the effects of the Spellplague (mostly the "returned Abeir lands were gone, the large rifts that had formed in various places fixed, the Sea of Fallen Stars was back to its normal banks, and many of the Gods had returned) are largely reversed. Shade is gone (which was actually a 3e thing), and Anauroch is a desert again.

What this means to the world depends a lot on your campaign. In my FR all traces of returned Abeir (including the dragonborn) are gone, but the shadovar will remain in a very small scale since the fall of Shade.

What they haven't detailed is much in terms of the rulers, but presumably most of that remains as detailed in the 4e FRCS and NCS unless new material says otherwise, such as Lord Neverember being removed from being a Lord of Waterdeep.

I suspect there is a gap between people who acknowledge the 4e material and the 3e and earlier material.

I do agree that we need a book like the SCAG for Cormyr/Heartlands/Sembia/Moonsea, and probably one for the lands south of Baldur's Gate. An overview of the political state and such would be fine with me, but a FRCS that repeats the material released in the APs and SCAG would be a mistake, as would releasing a "FRCS" without it. So a series of regional books makes the most sense (and appears to be what they're doing, at least to me). And if you're interested in running your Realms outside of the Sword Coast, you probably don't need the APs set in the Sword Coast. You'll probably still want the SCAG though. I see the material in the APs as extremely helpful for DMs running the Sword Coast and the North, but probably unnecessary for those running a campaign elsewhere.

Eventually one that covers the east (Thay Mulhorand, etc.). Beyond that, everything south of the Sea of Fallen Stars, east of Calimshan, and west of the Old Empires. Those seem to be the major sections that have received regular coverage over the years.

In many ways, I think that an AP set in a specific region will probably highlight the differences of actually being in those regions better than a campaign guide that just covers the region in much the same way CoS (or even the old I3-5 adventures, particularly the expanded super adventure release).

More than anything, though, I think that the material you are looking for will be released, eventually. But I doubt it will be in the form of a FRCS. It may not be what you'd like to see, but I think it's pretty clear that's the direction they're taking. And it's unlikely to change if sales continue as well as they have been.
 

No for me. Forgotten Realms is fine as a campaign setting, but pretty unexceptional. I find it kind of boring. The necessary parts are well covered in mechanics-independent books from previous editions. Since Wizards has such a limited release schedule, I'd rather they put the resources into a more interesting setting.
 

Remove ads

Top