D&D General "I have Played in or Run a Campaign Set in the Forgotten Realms" (a poll)

[Eyes of Nine]

I imagine there is a small but not insignificant percentage of folks who take things set in the FR and re-skin it to work in their homebrew or some other published setting. I know I have/do.

Oh I have definitely done that too. I wonder at what point something's not "in the FR"?

 

[GuardianLurker]

Aside from my 5e LMoP/Tyranny campaign, I've not run a game in FR. Played in an FR game in 2e. And of course, lifted spells, magic items, and other mechanical items over the years.

All of that said, in both cases with FR, it wasn't much more than a backdrop. And I was more than fine with that. The only reason I ran in FR was I had some beginning players, and I wanted to run a purely vanilla 5e game.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

All of that said, in both cases with FR, it wasn't much more than a backdrop. And I was more than fine with that. The only reason I ran in FR was I had some beginning players, and I wanted to run a purely vanilla 5e game.

It's funny, the two campaigns I ran - ToA and STK both lean heavily into hex crawling the area, so FR land exploration is very much a thing. However, at the same time, you don't really interact with the polities of FR too much - or at least not if you want to stay on the adventure path

 

[Azzy]

Decades ago, in the late 80s I was a player in a Grey-Box FR-era campaign. Then again in the 90s, I played in an Al'Qadim campaign. More recently, I've DMed Phandelver and Icespire Peak.

 

[MockingBird]

I run my games in FR but it's kinda mine own version. None of my players keep up with what has happened so I can change it however I need to. One day I'll jump to my own home brew world.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Wow, these are some amazing stats. I wonder how well they correlate with when people started playing D&D.

Keep in mind if you played one ill-fated session in the mid 90's you should have voted Yes, so it's not like that's saying much.

I would personally guess that the 15% or so are "homebrew settings always" players, with very few who play in only non-FR official (or 3pp) settings.

Now, if you asked "True or False: I usually play in the Forgotten Realms" we'd be having a different conversation (mostly about how much you can change and still call it the Realms)

 

[el-remmen]

Keep in mind if you played one ill-fated session in the mid 90's you should have voted Yes, so it's not like that's saying much.

"One ill-fated session" is considered a campaign now?

 

[haakon1]

We have a lot of old coots posting here. Looking at the stats, I'd bet about a quarter of us were playing D&D before the Forgotten Realms was anything more than some articles in Dragon magazine and thus were in no need of a new kitchen sink setting when TSR published it.

Well, that’s me alright.

 

[Corinnguard]

We have a lot of old coots posting here. Looking at the stats, I'd bet about a quarter of us were playing D&D before the Forgotten Realms was anything more than some articles in Dragon magazine and thus were in no need of a new kitchen sink setting when TSR published it.

I am old, but I didn't get to play in the realms until I was in college in the early 90's. I was introduced to 2e back then. TSR or Hasbro?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The answer is probably "no", but I cannot be absolutely certain.

I remember playing one session is two attempted campaigns set in FR (one of them weirdly using Rolemaster,) but I'm pretty sure neither never made past the first session, and definitely not past the second. So if one shots don't count, I don't think these count either.

It is possible that some of the prehistoric "generic fantasyland" campaigns I participated ages ago might have been set on FR, but I don't think so.

In any case, it is not a setting I have any interest in. Also, a lot of my gaming has been games other than D&D, so for that reason too I might have managed to avoid FR.