Where the Forgotten Realms lost me...

[MerricB]

I was extremely enthusiastic about the Forgotten Realms when it was first published - the 1st edition "Grey" box set. I remained enthusiastic for a couple of years, but slowly the enthusiasm faded. When the 2nd edition set came out, I was nonplussed. I bought the 3rd edition book, but I couldn't see what the fuss was all about, and with 4e... urgh. This is not the Realms I remember.

(Despite my initial reaction to the 4e FRCS, it may actually be a very playable campaign setting with a lot of good material.)

I think I've identified one of my primary reasons for this dissatisfaction:

The Forgotten Realms as presented in the Grey Box is the personal campaign setting of Ed Greenwood. The areas that are best described (Waterdeep and Shadowdale/Cormyr) are the areas that have had play in them. It's an actual world that exists because of roleplaying, rather than one that has been designed later to sell books.

With the areas that were expanded on later, you're not seeing the same touch. And I've never felt it has been the same. With 4e, you've lost practically all of the old "I created this and my players experienced it" feeling, and I think it's a sad loss.

Cheers!

 

[Agamon]

I'm not a huge Realms fan, never have been. But it's not a bad place to play and I own all 4 of the different edition setting sets/books. I think my problem is less yours, Merric, and more that the not-so-good novels make such an impact on the setting. I'm okay with settings that aren't developed through play, but huge changes because something spectacular has to happen in a book to make it more interesting kinda sucks.

That said, I agree, 4e FR looks like a fun place to run a game.

 

[Ranger REG]

I was extremely enthusiastic about the Forgotten Realms when it was first published - the 1st edition "Grey" box set. I remained enthusiastic for a couple of years, but slowly the enthusiasm faded. When the 2nd edition set came out, I was nonplussed. I bought the 3rd edition book, but I couldn't see what the fuss was all about, and with 4e... urgh. This is not the Realms I remember.

(Despite my initial reaction to the 4e FRCS, it may actually be a very playable campaign setting with a lot of good material.)

I think I've identified one of my primary reasons for this dissatisfaction:

The Forgotten Realms as presented in the Grey Box is the personal campaign setting of Ed Greenwood. The areas that are best described (Waterdeep and Shadowdale/Cormyr) are the areas that have had play in them. It's an actual world that exists because of roleplaying, rather than one that has been designed later to sell books.

With the areas that were expanded on later, you're not seeing the same touch. And I've never felt it has been the same. With 4e, you've lost practically all of the old "I created this and my players experienced it" feeling, and I think it's a sad loss.

Cheers!

While I appreciated what Ed Greenwood created it, and sometimes appreciated what WotC add to it, in the end, I have to make FR my own campaign setting customized for my group. I still try to retain the flavor of high-magic, high-adventure that Greenwood put into this setting, yet add my own group's flavor.

I was kinda let down when TSR have to use a cataclysmic event to rationalize the change in edition rules, so I was also disappointed that WotC use the same gimmick to explain the 4e makeover.

While many criticize, I embrace the virtual parallel development of the Realms that mirrors our own history.

While the fluff writing have not been exactly interesting to read (I try to get the gist of it by skimming), it's good that I'm a rules tinker to just take the mechanics and add to my games.

All I'm saying, take what made it interesing in the first place and just make it your own Forgotten Realms.

 

[Treebore]

While I appreciated what Ed Greenwood created it, and sometimes appreciated what WotC add to it, in the end, I have to make FR my own campaign setting customized for my group. I still try to retain the flavor of high-magic, high-adventure that Greenwood put into this setting, yet add my own group's flavor.

I was kinda let down when TSR have to use a cataclysmic event to rationalize the change in edition rules, so I was also disappointed that WotC use the same gimmick to explain the 4e makeover.

While many criticize, I embrace the virtual parallel development of the Realms that mirrors our own history.

While the fluff writing have not been exactly interesting to read (I try to get the gist of it by skimming), it's good that I'm a rules tinker to just take the mechanics and add to my games.

All I'm saying, take what made it interesing in the first place and just make it your own Forgotten Realms.

Yeah. I made FR my groups as well. So its not so much FR lost me, its always been "mine", I just haven't run it because so many other settings have attracted my interest even more since I last used the FR in 2000.

Every setting is just a "tool box" to me, so even when I don't like them I'll still buy them because there are always ideas worth stealing, maps worth using, creatures and character ideas worth stealing, etc...

 

[Brown Jenkin]

The Forgotten Realms as presented in the Grey Box is the personal campaign setting of Ed Greenwood. The areas that are best described (Waterdeep and Shadowdale/Cormyr) are the areas that have had play in them. It's an actual world that exists because of roleplaying, rather than one that has been designed later to sell books.

I think that may be the reason I am so enjoying our Ptolus campaign right now.

 

[Rakor]

I always found it weird how little interest I had in the realms. I started in second edition and picked up tons of the boxed sets. Lots of Planescape, Lots of Dark Sun, Birthright, Dragonlance, Al-Qadim. I even bought a pile of spelljammer. Strangely I never was interested in FR. I have two books, the 4th ed FRCG and Faiths and Pantheons which I got used. (Awesome book though, I dislike the pantheon on the whole but grabbing individual gods and having church write ups for them is great.)

I stayed away from the realms for a lot of reasons they gave in the Design & Development article.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Every setting is just a "tool box" to me, so even when I don't like them I'll still buy them because there are always ideas worth stealing, maps worth using, creatures and character ideas worth stealing, etc...

I liked FR because it was well detailed in what it did, and it made it a lot easier for me as a DM to not have to develop stuff. It was also easier in that a player could simply read the book and know the setting. I loved the supplements as they expanded the world by detailing new areas.

When I wasn't playing FR, it was easy enough to mine details from.

What drove me away was the TSR machine, throwing book after book. Couple that with novels that were "required" for the metaplot and it was too easy to run into just plain BAD metaplot.

I don't mind advancing the world & metaplot, but it should be in small ways rather than breaking the world over and over.


I never cared for the opposite approach like some companies have gotten to though, where everything is a toolbox with no feeling of "life" to it. I pay for the convenience of the world, if I'm going to do all the work myself I may as well not buy the book.

 

[Treebore]

I liked FR because it was well detailed in what it did, and it made it a lot easier for me as a DM to not have to develop stuff. It was also easier in that a player could simply read the book and know the setting. I loved the supplements as they expanded the world by detailing new areas.

When I wasn't playing FR, it was easy enough to mine details from.

What drove me away was the TSR machine, throwing book after book. Couple that with novels that were "required" for the metaplot and it was too easy to run into just plain BAD metaplot.

I don't mind advancing the world & metaplot, but it should be in small ways rather than breaking the world over and over.


I never cared for the opposite approach like some companies have gotten to though, where everything is a toolbox with no feeling of "life" to it. I pay for the convenience of the world, if I'm going to do all the work myself I may as well not buy the book.

Every setting I have bought, which is a lot, I'll even list as many as I can remember: Faerun, Greyhawk, Kalamar, Scarred Lands, DCC 35, Golarion, Wilderlands, Maztica, Hamanaptra, Freeport, Erde, Dawnforge, Planescape, Dark Sun, Al Qadim, and others.

NONE of them were lifeless tool boxes. They are tool boxes in that I kept what I liked, dropped what I disliked, and added in what I wanted. Thats what I thought of those settings. Plenty of life in the settings. Not lifeless tool boxes.

 

[Irda Ranger]

The Forgotten Realms as presented in the Grey Box is the personal campaign setting of Ed Greenwood. The areas that are best described (Waterdeep and Shadowdale/Cormyr) are the areas that have had play in them. It's an actual world that exists because of roleplaying, rather than one that has been designed later to sell books.

Agreed. I actually think that one of the good things that WotC did in the 4E addition was get rid of the lands that were less well thought out/blatant real-world transplants. Calimport/Memnon and High Imaskar are much more interesting than Fantasy-Moores and Fantasy-Egyptians. They don't quite have the same feel as the Dalelands or the North, but its an improvement.

 

[Khairn]

I liked FR because it was well detailed in what it did, and it made it a lot easier for me as a DM to not have to develop stuff.

I absolutely agree with you. The wealth of detail available to be used, enabled me to create the FR that I wanted, and gave me lots of fluff that I could easily add to the game. For a GM, it made customizing the Realms very fast.

Aside from the fact that 4E FR, nuked my campaign location and killed off 2 of the deities that my players followed, the time jump effectively eliminated the use of the existing wealth of earlier FR material in a "current" (1479) game.

I had the chance to read through some of the new FR book earlier today. I found it less useful for me as a GM, than the 3E book was, but then again, that book was a gold mine of FR goodness IMHO.