• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

The New Forgotten Realms - (About) A Year Later

Falstyr

First Post
Too much history, too many NPC's, too much lore...

That never has bothered me before. The authors of all those novels are DM's writing about their campaign. They make their own NPC's and give their interpretation of cities. This doesn't mean that you have to use that in your campaign. It is an interesting read and source of inspiration and nothing more. To me those novels are NOT valid sources of lore which people should get tight assed about. If your players get upset that your campaign doesn't match those novels...just smack them on the head for it.

So that leaves all the dragon and dungeon magazines as well as the hardcover releases. Even those don't have to be used into detail. I mean...why read about the lore and history about parts you're not going to visit? I couldn't care less what is happening in Winterhaven while the campaign is in the Dalelands.

This means that you only read up on a specific part of The Realms. Namely that which you are actually using. And that is only a few paragraphs of reading material. Jutting down the few key NPC's, note worthy locations, type of government and using the map and you're done. As a DM your job couldn't be any easier. You don't have to read or prepare a lot and thus can focus on adding the things to the city which you want to use. Add some cult members here and there which gather in the basement of one of the taverns planning to overthrow the government and you got yourself an adventure already.

Want to go to the Underdark while in the Dalelands than do it. You don't have to use any Underdark information per se. Those books are supplemental. They can be used if you wish to get more insight and inspiration, but they are not required material. Just like Race of Faerun and such. And even if you decide to use such supplements it'll be done in relatively small dosage. An amount which you can handle and digest. Just like reading only the geographical paragraphs of the locations you actually play in...is also the same as the amount of supplements you actually read at a time.

So you basically only take what you need one step at a time. Probably the outline of what you read will stick with you. This will allow you to get all you need about the entire realms. But what matters is that have all you need for the part you're actually visiting. Who gives a damn about nit picking details and all those bastard "lore masters" who need to get a life instead of worrying whether a detail of some fantasy world is used correctly or not.

The generic dwarf city Hammerfast is a great example. WoTC has placed it in their Nentir Vale in the back of the DMG. But what stops you from using it in your personal campaign? I've placed it south of Cormyr in some mountains. Is that correct by lore? Does it matter? No it does not matter. So just add such places in FR if you need it.

So to me...the vastness of FR lore and history can be a turn off at first glance because it can seem overwhelming. But when you think about what you'll actually be using and rationalize a bit then you realize that most reason people put forth is utter crap when used as a cop out.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


ferratus

Adventurer
Wow! I think that's the first time I've ever seen somebody talk about the Myth Drannor boxed set being anything other than a horrible product. Goes to show, I guess, that one man's floor is another man's ceiling. :)

Oh, don't get me wrong, "The Ruins of Myth Drannor" is a horrible product. If anyone's reading, for heaven's sake don't go out and buy it. But there are lots of interesting and outright magical places in Myth Drannor.
 


Primal

First Post
And here we have the problem in a nutshell, which is repeated in gaming groups and on the internet: "If you change details of FR go on! As long as those changes make sense for me as a lore-lover, of course." THIS is the root of the "lore tyranny" discussion: "I don´t mind your changes as long as i like them."

Plausible? A FR DM should be free to change what he likes how he likes it. But - no offense meant, Primal - i´ve encountered this opinion before, both on the internet and in real life. "You´re free to change stuff, but not THIS stuff, because me, the lore-guy, says this makes no sense. And i´m not going to tell you what THIS stuff is before you actually change it, because for a TRUE lover of the realms, it should be obvious!"

No thanks. This was the real reason why i started my Grey Box Campaign: nobody in my group has a clue about that timeline, so nobody can tell me that my changes were "not plausible."

No, you completely missed my point; what I meant is that if you're going to drop a major temple of Bane into Suzail or Silverymoon, I expect an in-game explanation for that. Likewise, if you replace Alustriel or Azoun with an NPC ruler of your own. If you want a setting in which you don't have to read a single book to get the basic facts about a kingdom right, I suggest running homebrewed setting.

We all have different kinds of expectations for internal consistency -- both in terms of setting-specific lore and what we think is "realistic" in a pseudo-medieval fantasy world (and let's not get into any "If it has dragons and flying fortresses, anything goes"-discussions ;)). Just as I find any inconsistencies in a fantasy novel breaking my Suspension of Disbelief (until an explanation is offered in the book), I do so in RPGs. So, I don't have a problem if the Temple of Elemental Evil is located near the City X in your own setting; however, if nobody knows about it for no other apparent reason (not even because of magical wards or anything) that "it's for the PCs", *then* I'd have a problem. Does all this clarify my point?
 

williamhm

First Post
No, you completely missed my point; what I meant is that if you're going to drop a major temple of Bane into Suzail or Silverymoon, I expect an in-game explanation for that. Likewise, if you replace Alustriel or Azoun with an NPC ruler of your own. If you want a setting in which you don't have to read a single book to get the basic facts about a kingdom right, I suggest running homebrewed setting.

We all have different kinds of expectations for internal consistency -- both in terms of setting-specific lore and what we think is "realistic" in a pseudo-medieval fantasy world (and let's not get into any "If it has dragons and flying fortresses, anything goes"-discussions ;)). Just as I find any inconsistencies in a fantasy novel breaking my Suspension of Disbelief (until an explanation is offered in the book), I do so in RPGs. So, I don't have a problem if the Temple of Elemental Evil is located near the City X in your own setting; however, if nobody knows about it for no other apparent reason (not even because of magical wards or anything) that "it's for the PCs", *then* I'd have a problem. Does all this clarify my point?

Not really dm should be free to change anything in a campaign book for any reason he wants. Keeping all fluff in the campaign guide the same limits dm creativity. I hate settings that have too much fluff because it limits what the dm and players can do with it. Give me a few basics and some mysterious plot hooks and Im good to go. Old FR was overly developed there was nothing mysterious or magical about it.
 

Keefe the Thief

Adventurer
No, you completely missed my point; what I meant is that if you're going to drop a major temple of Bane into Suzail or Silverymoon, I expect an in-game explanation for that. Likewise, if you replace Alustriel or Azoun with an NPC ruler of your own. If you want a setting in which you don't have to read a single book to get the basic facts about a kingdom right, I suggest running homebrewed setting.

We all have different kinds of expectations for internal consistency -- both in terms of setting-specific lore and what we think is "realistic" in a pseudo-medieval fantasy world (and let's not get into any "If it has dragons and flying fortresses, anything goes"-discussions ;)). Just as I find any inconsistencies in a fantasy novel breaking my Suspension of Disbelief (until an explanation is offered in the book), I do so in RPGs. So, I don't have a problem if the Temple of Elemental Evil is located near the City X in your own setting; however, if nobody knows about it for no other apparent reason (not even because of magical wards or anything) that "it's for the PCs", *then* I'd have a problem. Does all this clarify my point?


Absolutely.

I still don´t like it, but more power to you in your campaign. In my campaign, however, if i say "Alustriel never existed, ever" or "the Dragonborn blood cult has a sprawling citadel in the Quivering Forest", that´s how it is.
These boots are made for walking.
This setting is made for changing.

That the FR somehow emanates an 15´ radius aura of "only change if the control group would attest your changes an acceptable level of verisimilitude" is simply something that grates with me.
 
Last edited:

ProfessorCirno

Banned
Banned
Absolutely.

I still don´t like it, but more power to you in your campaign. In my campaign, however, if i say "Alustriel never existed, ever" or "the Dragonborn blood cult has a sprawling citadel in the Quivering Forest", that´s how it is.
These boots are made for walking.
This setting is made for changing.

That the FR somehow emanates an 15´ radius aura of "only change if the control group would attest your changes an acceptable level of verisimilitude" is simply something that grates with me.

It's not really just FR though.

If I entered an Eberron game and, two sessions in, the DM tells us that all warforged have been replaced by bloodthirsty robot vampires, and that the Valenar elves are now all cowards, I'd go "Hey, that's kinda cool. Also, you're a douche for telling us we were playing Eberron then suddenly switching things on us without forewarning."

I see no problems with a DM changing their setting, so long as they tell the player in advance, but being upset that the setting is made seems about bizarro. The whole point of playing a setting is to play...you know, a pre-made setting.

The only reason FR gets so much flak for it is because it's generic enough that a lot of DMs want to play it, but detailed enough to make them not want to play it at the same time. So they change things needlessly, when they could just be making their own damn setting.
 

Primal

First Post
Not really dm should be free to change anything in a campaign book for any reason he wants. Keeping all fluff in the campaign guide the same limits dm creativity. I hate settings that have too much fluff because it limits what the dm and players can do with it. Give me a few basics and some mysterious plot hooks and Im good to go. Old FR was overly developed there was nothing mysterious or magical about it.

William, I'm fine if you say that you don't personally like something, but you have the habit of always presenting your opinions as facts and I don't like it. I don't think lore limits a DM's creativity or that the "Old Realms" were not mysterious or magical, but I've already discussed these subjects with you to ad nauseaum on the WoTC boards and I don't want to repeat it here (note: I use a different alias here). Our gaming and DMing styles are at the other ends of the spectrum, so let's just agree to disagree and leave it there, okay?
 

Scribble

First Post
I see no problems with a DM changing their setting, so long as they tell the player in advance, but being upset that the setting is made seems about bizarro. The whole point of playing a setting is to play...you know, a pre-made setting.

The only reason FR gets so much flak for it is because it's generic enough that a lot of DMs want to play it, but detailed enough to make them not want to play it at the same time. So they change things needlessly, when they could just be making their own damn setting.

In my case when I play a pre made setting I do so because:

1. Some of the ideas in the flavor of that setting spark my creativity. (For me this is more the case when those flavor ideas are snippets, and unfilled in ideas. Too much info actually does the opposite, and tends to sort of color my creativity too much.) This is the reason I liked Scarred Lands in 3e. WW is REALLY good at the snippets of ideas thing in my opinion.

2. I want som of the larger stuff done for me because I don't have time.

I don't have time to draw a full world map, or do the larger this realm is here part or this realm is there part. I let the pre-made setting take care of that stuff, and I fill in the details as we go.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top