D&D 1E Forgotten Realms in AD&D 1st Edition a better setting for adventures?

[Maxperson]

FR has constantly changed and expanded and been influenced by different authors throughout its existence. The first 1e Campaign setting boxed set for instance includes the non-Ed Greenwood Moonshaes incorporating a Celtic themed area that was originally conceived of by Douglas Niles for his D&D novel trilogy.

You can have vastly different setting flavors depending on what sourcebooks you use and what areas you focus on.

The Red Wizards for example go from D&Dified Conan Stygian sorcerers, to high magic 2e villain country (with the evil never wins caveat of the late 1e-2e era), to 3e's evil magical merchant diplomatic enclaves, to the lich takeover.

I run my Red Wizards as a mix between the 2e and the 3e.

 

[Maxperson]

WoTC did released Ed Greenwood Presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms I never checked it but blurb says it's a book that provides a rare glimpse into the setting as imagined by its creator. It contain new information on its visible and clandestine rulers, various merchant and trade princes, the churches and mercenary companies of the Realms, renown magic-users and secret societies, adventuring companies, and the web of alliances and enmities that connect them.

I've never seen that book. I'm going to have to check it out.

 

[teitan]

I guess I don’t know what Realms I want. As a Greyhawk DM (running 3.5e), I would use it as an alternate world, and it sounds like the Gray Box AD&D is the good one (~1357 DR). My PC’s used Dismissal on a semi-friendly NPC and I randomly determined he’s in FR … probably at the Yawning Portal.

Seems like 2e was ~1367 DR, 3e ~1379 DR, 4e ~14xx DR, not sure on 5e, with huge changes for the editions. At least in Dungeon, it seems to matter a lot what DR it is, if it’s after Spellplague or not, certain gods dead or not, etc.

Whereas GH has only the GH Wars changing the setting between AD&D and 2e, with the 3e setting making sense of a 2e messy setting … and frankly the Wars don’t change game play. Most DM’s, including myself, have rejected at least some aspects of the Wars changes. (Not to get too far off topic, for me the concept that wars were all related and conveniently started and stopped together with a treaty with an evil god(!), and that PC actions in the mega adventures TOEE and G123D123Q1 are “fail” and in the past is where I say, um, no.)

For FR, perhaps it’s better to know the 5e version, to keep up with the game? But consensus seems to be AD&D 1e, eh?

Take each version as it’s own thing and judge it there, not based on changes and a continuation of one world.

 

[teitan]

I actually liked those. It made it super easy to prepare an adventure with the monsters you were planning on using separated for easy access. Completely obsolete now with digital tools being what they are, but it came in handy at the time, and I was actually annoyed when the MM came out as a book.

It was an ok idea until pages fell out.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

It was an ok idea until pages fell out.

Those punched holes were so fragile. I had to purchase sticker rings to stick around the hole to repair and strengthen.

 

[Stormonu]

It was an ok idea until pages fell out.

Or worse, you bought one of the addendums that wouldn't fit in the correct spot alphabetically. Which was the original intent in the first place!

 

[Yora]

Take each version as it’s own thing and judge it there, not based on changes and a continuation of one world.

To which the question is: How well is the 2nd edition really suited as a setting for D&D campaigns?
Of course you can place campaigns down in it, but how does it provide adventure opportunities for GMs to turn into campaigns? What does it dangle in front of the players to entice them to explore or get involved?

And in regards to the topic at hand, is that an overall improvement?

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

To which the question is: How well is the 2nd edition really suited as a setting for D&D campaigns?

That I think will depend on the needs of a GM.

There was a time I wanted absolutely as much published information as possible about every nook and cranny and early 2e Realms scratched that itch to just know as much as I could about something I was obsessed with. I was a setting fan so I was equally obsessed with Mystara, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, and Greyhawk (controversial take: my favorite era is From the Ashes). The late 2e era turned my off so hard I have never gotten the urge to return to DMing there though. It became too much for my taste. I know that others will love having so much.

 

[gorice]

I'm not sure I really agree. If anything, it makes smaller settlements away from the big cities more dangerous because the regional rulership is less likely to be willing to send armed assistance to help with what they'd see as the insignificant troubles of a smattering of peasants. A large disparity in population makes the cities feel more important to those who live in them.

The thing that always bothers me about this is that big cities need big hinterlands to feed them, and means of shipping the food. Rome had the whole med, and Egypt in particular, to to supply its needs. What does somewhere like Waterdeep have?

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The thing that always bothers me about this is that big cities need big hinterlands to feed them, and means of shipping the food. Rome had the whole med, and Egypt in particular, to to supply its needs. What does somewhere like Waterdeep have?

The Goldenfields and the plant growth spell? It also felt implied that all the towns up the Dessarin Valley were involve exporting food to Waterdeep.