D&D 5E The case for (and against) a new Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
Okay. Good. But we may be talking about new time DMs who may be inclined to get this because it is "also a mini setting".
For a new DM it is exactly that. The ability of a DM to manage information increases in direct correlation with their experience. A veteran GM is buying the book for very different reasons. Heck, I don't even remember the last time I ran something "out of the box". A new DM isn't going to be upset about the lack of info though, generally speaking and IMO. I think part of the issue here is that we're talking about newbie DMs and expert level re-purposing of material both in the same breath. A newbie DM isn't going to be field stripping the module and selling it's parts on the black market.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

eyeheartawk

#1 Enworld Jerk™
Also, how many fans of other official settings would love to even have as much published coverage as the "Remembered Realms" has received in 5e's lifetime?

Yeah. Unless you're a fan of MtG settings, in which case, WOTC has got you, fam.

I mean it's almost as if I'm saying focusing on the Sword Coast to the virtual exclusion of everything else (In FR and outside of it) is, IDK, not great?
 


The players can be in town as mercenaries for Baldur's Gate, and are exploring the jungle for money. Done, campaign solved. Hooks for this are literally everywhere.
And if they die what happens. What about all the undead infesting Chult. A great many of the motivations and npcs are tied to Death Curse sites.
But we can just strip all of this away.
 




For a new DM it is exactly that. The ability of a DM to manage information increases in direct correlation with their experience. A veteran GM is buying the book for very different reasons. Heck, I don't even remember the last time I ran something "out of the box". A new DM isn't going to be upset about the lack of info though, generally speaking and IMO. I think part of the issue here is that we're talking about newbie DMs and expert level re-purposing of material both in the same breath. A newbie DM isn't going to be field stripping the module and selling it's parts on the black market.
Yes. I also change the adventure to suit the players. This is a given with experience. If a new DM is lured to the book because it is "apparently a mini setting" they will be disappointed and frustrated.
With the same breath we should not discount new DMs for their ingenuity and creativity.
 


Aldarc

Legend
Yeah. Unless you're a fan of MtG settings, in which case, WOTC has got you, fam.

I mean it's almost as if I'm saying focusing on the Sword Coast to the virtual exclusion of everything else (In FR and outside of it) is, IDK, not great?
You're talking more snark than sense here.

As others have pointed out, the idea that it has been exclusively Sword Coast is demonstrably untrue (e.g., Tomb of Annihilation). The idea that it has been solely MtG settings (a whopping two) as opposed to materials for prior official D&D settings is also demonstrably untrue (e.g., Ghosts of Saltmarsh, Eberron: Rising from the Last War, Curse of Strahd, Tales from the Yawning Portal, etc.). And this also does not take into account that WotC has a slower production output for 5e than prior editions.

I would personally love to see more published materials for non-FR or even non-Sword Coast materials, but I can understand that it basically gives groups who may have their Lost Mines of Phandelver adventure in the Starter Kit more directions to go with their games. Perhaps it's a feedback loop, but I can understand some of the reason why WotC may choose to go that route.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top