Forgotten Realms...build up/bash

[The Demon Ted]

Excuse me if this is a topic which has been previously covered, I could not find a thread that related to this.

Anyways, as I've been browsing the threads, I've noticed some pronounced anti-forgotten realms sentiment, and I'm really curious why. I've not really played a setting other than forgotten realms in D&D, and so am of limited perspective, but forgotten realms seems to cover the whole "high magic prebuilt setting that allows for customization on the smaller scale" setting. I realize that it has some definate inconsitancies (namely, the "iconic" characters in the setting are equipped...rather poorly) in plot and sensically, but these aren't bad enough to threaten my suspension of disbelief. Anyways, to the point. For what reasons do you dislike Forgotten Realms as a setting and/or why do you like it? (And yes, I know a homebrew campaign is going to allow you a lot more flexibility, that is there nature. I'm asking of a critic of FR based soley on the prebuilt setting standpoint).

I like FR because it offers such a diverse amount of archetypal organizations, settings, and peoples that no matter what style of campaign you want to run, you can just move it to a different area. I also like the long and varied history of the realms, there is a lot of previous story and conflict to build upon.

What I don't like about the realms: The celebrity characters feel kind of cheesy, and don't contribute much. Also, the game contradicts itself on a few levels...mainly the dark elves. With an entire religion centered towards good drow, abounding half drow, and Drizzit the Much Copied, you'd think the people of the realms would view Dark elves a little more like humans: There are good ones and there are bad ones. Also, the mages of Thay get there butt kicked on a regular basis. You kind of feel sorry for them.

Anyways, would love to hear your opinions. Also, if you have a particulariy good (and yet still fairly iconic D&D) setting you've enjoyed, I'd be happy to hear about it, being still relatively new to D&D.

Ted

 

[Dark Jezter]

Anyways, as I've been browsing the threads, I've noticed some pronounced anti-forgotten realms sentiment, and I'm really curious why.

Forgotten Realms is the most popular D&D setting. Because of this popularity, many of those who don't care for it like to loudly proclaim their distaste for it at every opportunity to show how cool and nonconfirmist they are (this happens with anything that has acheived great popularity). Another common group of FR bashers are Greyhawk fans who are bitter that the 3e FR book got the red carpet treatement, while the 3e Greyhawk book was severely lacking in size, descriptive test, and quality of artwork.

Note that I'm not ripping on people who don't like FR, and can understand that it isn't everyone's cup of tea. I'm mainly pointing my finger at those who can't hear the words "Forgotten Realms" without going into rant mode.

 

[EricNoah]

I don't know that it gets bashed all that much more than anything else. Some folks felt a little burned when the novels (Avatar Trilogy among them) seemed to drive the setting's metaplot in un-fun directions; others, like you, have an issue with the "celebrity NPCs." I have run and played in FR games several times and I do appreciate the level of detail and the background info that one can draw upon for inspiration and adventure material.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The people who don't like the Forgotten Realms don't like it for the same problems the OP sees in it. They just don't find that the strengths of the world outweigh its minuses. Personally, if the entire setting were more like "The Silver Marches" than 99 percent of the other products -- that is, a setting that fits together more or less reasonably and has a clear need for player character heroes -- I suspect people wouldn't diss it quite so often or loudly.

(And yes, defenders can say that all the FR superheroes are off saving the days somewhere else. Of course, the notion that they're ALWAYS doing that, even in the face of orc invasions, etc., is just as silly as just saying "and then Elminster shows up and fixes everything, the end.")

 

[Vanion]

The people who don't like the Forgotten Realms don't like it for the same problems the OP sees in it. They just don't find that the strengths of the world outweigh its minuses.

Hit the nail on the head. I admittedly don't have any great liking for the setting, but haven't genuinely bashed it, just pointed out that it's not to my taste. FR isn't by any means a bad setting - it has a lot of strong points and was made with a strong design ethos which appeals to a lot of people. Being someone who this doesn't apply to, I don't play it, but by the same token that's hardly because it's the most endorsed/popular product and I'm "t3h inkr3d33buLl n0n-k0nf0rm4 d00d" or because I somehow feel superior to people who do enjoy it. I've got weird taste as far as Campaign Settings go, so I play stuff that's to my liking.

On why I dislike it, the points Ted made were a good start, plot inconsistency being one of the most annoying things. The overabundance and incredible mundanity of magic would be one of the other biggies - it's simply personal taste that I like the acquisition of unusual items and powers to be a very special event, so that the players find it to be far more rewarding. The way in which spellcasters of all cut and cloth are a common feature in the setting is something I don't like having in a campaign, not to mention their widespread acceptance and the lack of stigma against any spellcasting group (only followers of a particular deity/organisation).

Added to that is the general feeling of immaturity and lack of depth I find in the setting. Political ideals in particular are rarely self-contradicting in any measure (as you will always see in real societies), let alone complex. Religion is something that I find even more burdensome to use - followers of evil deities are simply seen as evil, they do evil, they generally understand that what they're doing is evil and have next to no moral justification for what they do. Sharites take the cake in that regard, having one of their main points of doctrine to be to hunt Paladins simply because they're good. It's very difficult to structure realistic characters and villains upon that premise. Certainly, you'll find examples of their counterparts in the real world (Satanists etc) but they're few and far between, and would never be comprised of the numbers FR makes them out to be.

This is one of those things that annoys the hell out of me - most people, when committing acts that could be categorically labelled evil rarely see themselves that way. They have a sense of justification that (within their own mind) makes their acts the right and proper thing to do, not "h4h4 i li3k t3h k1lling". You can apply this to some degree to your own NPCs, but it's not something that you ever really find to be within the setting.

Little things jar at me, like how there isn't a single natural desert on Faerun or how a couple of river bodies manage to run uphill at a couple of points after their source. Yes, this would probably be seen as incredibly anal retentive and overly critical on my part, but personally I like the setting to make sense from the ground up (quite literally), in terms of ecogology, history and anthropology.

The general acceptance of the "Adventurer" is something else that makes me cringe. Moon elves apparently expect that a good percentage of their young population will travel the world, kill things, take their money and get resurrected if they happen to run into misfortune. They're then accepted back, take up a trade or profession and life goes on.

This is about as realistic as me just up and asking a friend, "Hey, you want to fly to North Korea or Cambodia to kill some people, upgrade our weapons and take their stuff? How about we go about busting heads and exposing a big drug cartel interstate then?"

There are tons of settings that thrive on the "adventurer" paradigm, and I simply avoid them. If you like it, more power to you.

Ironically, on most people hating the Drow, I don't find that to be unreasonable at all. Take the Germans post WW2 or Russia during the cold war - being in a state of constant opposition between nations meant that there was aggression and outright hatred on the part of most citizens towards the other country on a level that was all-consuming. Propaganda obviously fueled this sense of righteous anger to the point where there were a lot of people who were categorically willing to look at an entire nation/race as evil.

Look at the German's own actions against the Jews and Romani (Gypsies) leading up to and during WW2 - almost an entire nation was convinced to hate people on the basis that they were somehow responsible for the current economic hardships. In a world at FR's point, where education would be far more limited to say the least (or should be anyway), how would the vast majority of people even know of Elistraee? All they've heard of is attacks on the Silver Marches, what little information the Tel'Quessir make available to outsiders and the overlying elvish prejudice that remains from the Crown Wars and years of raids.

 

[Greylock]

The inconsistencies bug me as well, and the way cultural differences are basically explained away by the setting, instead of justified, goes to the root. Each race somehow landed whole and pure in the FR. You want a desert? Mages blasted away the earth. None of it makes any sense if you are looking for a world that has basic logic. If you want things to make sense, you have to keep buying the books.

 

[wingsandsword]

This is about as realistic as me just up and asking a friend, "Hey, you want to fly to North Korea or Cambodia to kill some people, upgrade our weapons and take their stuff? How about we go about busting heads and exposing a big drug cartel interstate then?"

The "Adventurer paradigm" may not work well in the modern world, but the idea of leaving home for a strange new land full of danger and opportunity, probably some violence, and the chance for great riches has a long history in humanity.

In the 19th century, there was the Wild West out there for easterners to go and make a fortune in gold (or any one of various get-rich-quick schemes), thanks to dime novels it held the allure of danger, riches and opportunity that drove people there. The gold rush in the Yukon was another time people were willing to throw it all away to go to a strange land and face great hardship to get riches. The entire westward expansion of the United States from beyond the Appalachian mountains was driven by the adventurers of their time. A few centuries ago, you could be a European commoner who saw the New World as a chance for a new life, land, wealth, relative freedom, and getting there and making your living there would be tough.

Military service is another form of "adventuring", to give up your normal life for danger, combat, possibly some wealth, fame, glory and see strange new lands you might never see otherwise. It might be the Foriegn Legion, the Crusades, the Roman Legions, or the Marine Corps, but the concept has been the same for millennia. Military or naval service is an excuse for "adventuring" in many campaigns.

In the modern culture, "adventuring" has less of a role because much more of our world is explored (and what isn't cannot be explored without expensive technology), and our culture is far more "risk adverse". Everyday risks and dangers (unhealthy foods, carcinogens, crime and public safety) that would have been overlooked as insignificant or unavoidable in prior decades or centuries are now serious concerns. "Adventuring" probably was never the most illustrious career in the world, but the D&D model of "I'm leaving home with just some basic stuff, some friends, and we're going to try to get rich and powerful beating up some orcs and zombies" works in a world with savage aggressive humanoids, restless undead, giant dungeons filled with treasure, and plenty of magic and unexplored regions. A medieval culture combined with the apparently economics and conditions of a normal fantasy world make adventuring as common as its analog would be on Earth.

"Hey, let's join the Crusade, go across the known world to a place we've only heard about in legend, fight an entire army, and try and become heroes and save the most important city int he world!"

"Hey, let's give up our boring and abusive life in the factories of this crowded city to go out west and mine for gold, buy some land, risk indian attack and bandits, and become fabulously wealthy!"

"Hey, let's go with one of those colonies that are forming over in the new world, leaving behinid the strict social order of our homeland for a new land with boundless potential. The natives are a little hostile and the trip itself is frought with peril, but think of what we could accomplish!"

"Hey, let's give up our boring life here on this dying farm, take up those old swords over the mantle, go into that old abandoned dwarven keep in the hills and see if we can bring back some treasure, and maybe go to the big city with it afterwards. Sure there are probably monsters, but we're tough and strong, and we've got some sharp swords, and think of all the money in there!"

 

[Felon]

Wingsandsword, that's a great post that makes a great point. But I do think the concept of the adventurer as an occupation is a little over-institutionalized in FR. Particularly in the Swoard Coast, where it's treated like a state-regulated industry, with adventurer's guilds that offer 401 plans and HMO packages.

 

[Felon]

Personally, if the entire setting were more like "The Silver Marches" than 99 percent of the other products -- that is, a setting that fits together more or less reasonably and has a clear need for player character heroes -- I suspect people wouldn't diss it quite so often or loudly.

Actually, I don't even think the Silver Marches is all that much of an exception. Why does Alustriel--one of the highest-level wizards in Faerun--need low-level heroes to stop any major threats? Sure, PC's can patrol for orc maurauders or goblin bandits so she can focus on important affairs, but as soon as all helll breaks loose--say the hordes come pouring down out of the mountains--then Alustriel should show up and make it all better.

King Obould Many-Arrows is the highest muckity-much warlord of all the orcs in the Marches, and he's what, 9th level? Why hasn't she turned this mortal enemy (and every other orc within 10 miles) into a dandelion?

Then again, wasn't the latest Drizzt trilogy set against the backdrop of an orc invasion in the SIlver Marches? Anyone know how they addressed the Alustriel issue?

 

[Odysseus]

Although there are a few inconsitants. Overall its good. Bear in mind it didn't start pre built, its had so many add ons from different people, there was bound to be some problems.

My only real problem with FR are the deities. Theres something like 120 in faiths and pantheons, and I don't like any one them!