D&D 5E How do you feel about the Forgotten Realms?

[amerigoV]

I liked some of the old FR CRPG like Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights, and I've played a couple of campaigns in Faerun, but for the life of me I can't remember anything that stands out about Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter - they were just completely generic fantasy cities (or at least that's the impression that they left me)... Is there really something distinctive about them or do you like them because they feel familiar (and there's nothing wrong with that: I like them because they feel familiar.)

I am going to turn this around a bit from what I posted before as you are zeroing into something key. Greyhawk and FR are now considered "generic fantasy" - but that is because they both early on the scene and were widely disseminated amongst the D&D crowd. When they came out there were not generic because there was nothing to compare them to, except maybe some of the fantasy worlds in literature. Now, everything gets compared to them in contrast. They are the "norm", the benchmark, the baseline, the generic. Its the comfort food of D&D worlds. That in itself is a distinction.

Its kinda like mashed potatoes. Lots of people like them, but its not because of explicit traits. Its a comfort food. You can always add to it (I am sure there is a 1001 ways to spice up mashed potatoes out there), but all the more spiced up version runs the risk of people not liking them. Eberron has its spice of magical technology - some people love it, but there are strong feels against it as well ("not in my game!").

 

[GSHamster]

I am going to turn this around a bit from what I posted before as you are zeroing into something key. Greyhawk and FR are now considered "generic fantasy" - but that is because they both early on the scene and were widely disseminated amongst the D&D crowd. When they came out there were not generic because there was nothing to compare them to, except maybe some of the fantasy worlds in literature. Now, everything gets compared to them in contrast. They are the "norm", the benchmark, the baseline, the generic. Its the comfort food of D&D worlds. That in itself is a distinction.

I was going to say the exact same thing. The Realms is comfort food.

Another important thing about the Realms is that the setting can stay in the background, and just be a mere backdrop to your characters. With a lot of the newer settings, it feels like you have to "engage" with the setting, that the setting exerts a force on your character.

For example, in Planescape, there's pressure to pick a faction, to engage in philosophies. If you want to do that, that's great. But if you just want to make a fighter looking to get rich, then that extra pressure is resented. In Eberron, it feels like you need to take a stand on the political situation, or on how magic works and the dragonmarks.

The Realms meanwhile, just are. There's no greater theme, no greater purpose. And that can be freeing.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Greyhawk and the Realms are great for sandbox dungeon bashing campaigns but can easily be used for more in depth roleplaying. I like that.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

I am going to turn this around a bit from what I posted before as you are zeroing into something key. Greyhawk and FR are now considered "generic fantasy" - but that is because they both early on the scene and were widely disseminated amongst the D&D crowd. When they came out there were not generic because there was nothing to compare them to, except maybe some of the fantasy worlds in literature. Now, everything gets compared to them in contrast. They are the "norm", the benchmark, the baseline, the generic. Its the comfort food of D&D worlds. That in itself is a distinction.

Its kinda like mashed potatoes. Lots of people like them, but its not because of explicit traits. Its a comfort food.

I think you're saying two different things here, and while I agree with the latter (FR is comfort food, unsophisticated but nourishing) I strongly disagree with the former: the setting never felt original or groundbreaking. It certainly doesn't feel like that now, but it wasn't different back then. It's not that FR is generic, it's that FR doesn't have any element that is unexpected (which is part of its appeal, actually.) Elves, evil wizards, ancient ruins: it's a hall of fame of everything that is commonly found in mythology and fantasy literature.

If you read Elric, The Grey Mouser, The Dying Earth, Amber, even The Lord of the Rings - fantasy series written before the Realms, they all feel fresher and more vivid even now than Faerun, because they're not made of borrowed parts or because they've managed to give a new spin to old ideas, which is something that FR's authors has always struggled to do.

 

[sgtscott658]

Ok we get it, after 8 posts of yours not liking FR, dont you think its time to move on?

I think you're saying two different things here, and while I agree with the latter (FR is comfort food, unsophisticated but nourishing) I strongly disagree with the former: the setting never felt original or groundbreaking. It certainly doesn't feel like that now, but it wasn't different back then. It's not that FR is generic, it's that FR doesn't have any element that is unexpected (which is part of its appeal, actually.) Elves, evil wizards, ancient ruins: it's a hall of fame of everything that is commonly found in mythology and fantasy literature.

If you read Elric, The Grey Mouser, The Dying Earth, Amber, even The Lord of the Rings - fantasy series written before the Realms, they all feel fresher and more vivid even now than Faerun, because they're not made of borrowed parts or because they've managed to give a new spin to old ideas, which is something that FR's authors has always struggled to do.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Ok we get it, after 8 posts of yours not liking FR, dont you think its time to move on?

I'm trying to contribute to the conversation in a constructive way, sorry if it rubs you the wrong way.

 

[dagger]

If you read Elric, The Grey Mouser, The Dying Earth, Amber, even The Lord of the Rings - fantasy series written before the Realms, they all feel fresher and more vivid even now than Faerun, because they're not made of borrowed parts or because they've managed to give a new spin to old ideas, which is something that FR's authors has always struggled to do.

Not everyone reads the same books or any books. I did not become a heavy reader until high school, and was already using FR in middle school.

 

[WayneLigon]

I can take it or leave it. I liked the original Realms set and loved reading the various details that Greenwood wrote about in the Dragon. After TSR felt the need to make huge wholesale changes in a setting just to 'explain' the changes in 2E, I mostly stopped paying attention to it. I do dislike how it trained a whole company's art department to make crappy slipshod sketch maps and pass them off as something useable, and how that bled over into so many third party products.

What I would like to see now, would be an indication of what Greenwood's actual campaign setting was like before TSR/WOTC got their hands on it, and put in all the expansions and details and add-ons shoe-horned in various places.

 

[Greg K]

While not one of my favorite settings (which would be Al Qadim, Darksun (original boxed set), and Ravenloft (Realm of Terror boxed set)), I like the original grey box, the original gazetteers, and some of the 2e supplements.

In my opinion, the Time of Trouble and all changes introduced to the Forgotten Realms over various editions since are better off forgotten.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Not everyone reads the same books or any books. I did not become a heavy reader until high school, and was already using FR in middle school.

And that's fine. I wasn't speaking in relative terms: these books are fresher whether you read them at the time or not. They still are fresher now - which doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with FR, of course.