Have you been disillusioned by the Forgotten Realms?

[Dark Jezter]

· How do you feel about the setting now, and why do you feel that way?

It's my favorite published D&D setting. I love just how vast and detailed the setting is. The 3e FRCS contains enough material to run several years worth of campaign, plus it's well-organized, interesting, and has lots of good artwork and crunchy goodness. The Baldur's Gate games are what initially got me interested in the setting, but the 3e FRCS is what turned me into a fan.

· Are you as happy with it as you are Greyhawk and Eberron, the other two supported settings?

I like FR much more than Greyhawk, and I'm not familiar enough with Eberron to comment on that one.

· Are you as happy with it as you used to be? Alternately, are you as unhappy with it as you used to be?

I like FR even more than I did back in the 2e days, although I do dislike the ever-growing number of elf subraces.

 

[Dark Psion]

I would have to say Other because there is no yes & no option.

3rd edition FR has been kind of Blah, but that is mainly because we are going back to all the places I have already been. Whenever they cover new territory, I like it!

The other problem with 3rd & 3.5 is that they are changing the realms to fit the rules and that hurts the setting. If they do a 4th edition Forgotten Realms, they need to do it like Malhavok's Arcana Unearthed and Iron Heroes, change the rules to fit the setting.

 

[Dark Jezter]

The other problem with 3rd & 3.5 is that they are changing the realms to fit the rules and that hurts the setting. If they do a 4th edition Forgotten Realms, they need to do it like Malhavok's Arcana Unearthed and Iron Heroes, change the rules to fit the setting.

So I guess things like Shadow Weave magic, special paladin & monk multiclassing rules, and regional feats don't count?

 

[BOZ]

i was big into the FR back in the 2E days. i couldn't get enough of it. there were just too many changes ("fluff" as well as "crunch") in the translation to 3E, to keep the world consistent with the rules, and i just didn't think all of that was necessary. i voted Yes.

 

[Storyteller01]

So I guess things like Shadow Weave magic, special paladin & monk multiclassing rules, and regional feats don't count?

Those weren't rules changes so much as clunky additions. It took a while to get spellfire into a working model that didn't overshadow other players (too much).

 

[the Jester]

I really dug the 1e boxed set, but after that the focus was all about the npcs. It lost me before 2e even came out.

3e FR stuff is ok, but the lack of internal consistency due to the change really bugs me. So one thumb down to the FR for me.

 

[Waldorf]

Have I been disillusioned by the Forgotten Realms?

Yes, and I don't even play in it.

 

[Trance Fiend]

I said no. I really like the Forgotten Realms, and the boatload of lore and history that the world contains. I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. And for some reason, this world works for me. My players prefer that I run this world over any others.

 

[Blackthorne]

I hated the realms back in the 90s. Terribly disneyfied setting.

Right now, the realms are pretty cool again.

 

[Serendipity]

I have to say, I greatly preferred the Realms waaaay back in the day in which the only source for such a thing was Ed Greenwood's articles in Dragon magazine. When it became the default setting for (A)D&D 1.0/2.0 it always struck me as, by nessecity, stretched to accomodate the game's needs - as opposed to the other way around.
Between that, and the evil chitinous thing that happens when a game world is dictated by a seemingly endless parade of hit or miss fiction, well, there you are.
my two pence