D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[Caliban]

This. 100% this. This is precisely what I'm talking about. And, if as others say, I can just ignore it, then WHY BOTHER?

Don't bother.

What reason do I have to use this map and not one of a thousand others out there that are just as high quality?

None. There is no reason you "have" to use this map or any other.

And, if I DO use this map, isn't there some expectations on the part of the players that I will actually use FR material? That's a fairly reasonable expectation no?

Not really, no. I've used maps just to have city names and regions names I can point to when asking what direction the players want to go in.

If you are interested in using FR material, then it's reasonable to expect you to use it. If you are not interested in using FR material, then no, it's not a reasonable expectation.

Unless your players are FR enthusiasts and insist on playing in the realms (which is actually a really bad idea if you personally don't care for the realms), then you have no reason to use the FR setting (other than WOTC marketing, threats against your family, and mind control. But barring any of those...no reason).

I keep going around in circles.

Yes, I'm starting to notice that myself.

 

[prosfilaes]

You're still posting I don't like Dragonlance or Ravenloft I don't go to those threads and keep stating why I don't like them.

It is a thread titled 'Why FR is "Hated"', after all.

 

[Demetrios1453]

ARRGGHGGHGHGHH!!!!

Then why is everyone arguing with me?

Q: Why don't you like Forgotten Realms?
A: Because I am not interested in the mountain of material for the setting.

Why is that not just the end of the freaking conversation?

Because, after giving you various reasons which you reject, various posters keep offering you the off-ramp ("Well, sorry, but if none of this suits you, then don't use it.") and you insist on staying on the circle freeway for another go around. Since we're not going to change the reasons we're giving you, you're not going to stop rejecting them; so if you're getting dizzy from going around in circles, take the exit offered you!

 

[Shasarak]

ARRGGHGGHGHGHH!!!!

Then why is everyone arguing with me?

Q: Why don't you like Forgotten Realms?
A: Because I am not interested in the mountain of material for the setting.

Why is that not just the end of the freaking conversation?

I get the same feeling with BattleTech (?Mech). It seems like a really cool game of Giant Mechs but which version to play and where to start is the question.

 

[Mirtek]

. That is, 3E Eberron has no NPCs of such level the PCs may never reach, and does not present NPCs as a major thing about the setting, whereas the 3E FRCS does.

You mean no such NPC until you Start with the supplement about the dragon cobtinent with it's population of great wyrm + level XX NPC who secretly police the world and Make sure no one messes with their Interpretation of the prophecy?

 

[Sadras]

Depending on what era Dragonlance you're talking about. In pre-3e, no character (other than Raistlin) was higher than 18th and that was strictly enforced in the rules. I don't know what happened in 3e era DL, so, I cannot comment. But, note, the other two heads of the wizard's order were lower level than Par-Salian and virtually no NPC other than a very, very few were in double digit levels.

DL is a VERY low power setting.

My memory is failing on this and dont have the book in front of me, but it was mentioned in the 2e DL setting book that if you reached 16th+ level your characters were approached by a deity or two to get wisked away or something to that effect.

 

[Hussar]

You're still posting I don't like Dragonlance or Ravenloft I don't go to those threads and keep stating why I don't like them.

As was mentioned, it IS a thread about why FR is hated. I keep trying to get someone to sell the setting to me but, the only responses I get are either, "Well, ignore the setting material" or "don't use the setting". Neither of which is a ringing endorsement of the setting.

I get the same feeling with BattleTech (?Mech). It seems like a really cool game of Giant Mechs but which version to play and where to start is the question.

I can totally get what you're saying. And, to boot, it really depends on whether you're looking for a wargame or an RPG. But, yeah, there's a bloody mountain of background material in Battletech. And, yuppers, I can see that as a huge turn off for trying to get into the game.

As a Battletech fan, I do have to say that the Catalyst Games stuff is very good. Their Basic Box covers the game pretty darn well and if you pick up one of the Tech Readouts (3025 is my favorite period - I have no love for the clan stuff that comes later), you're good to go for the wargame.

But, yeah, I can totally sympathise.

-----

For me, and this is purely my selfish wishes here and certainly not what I expect from WotC, I LOVE the setting guides for the Magic the Gathering game that have come out recently. The three guides that have come out so far are about 40 pages long, chock a block with TONS of flavor, and very much what I want for a setting. Add a decent couple of maps and I would gladly play in any of those three settings for years.

 

[Yaarel]

The Forgotten Realms is extremely flavorful. Its central theme is, precisely, "the soap opera of the gods".

It is sort of like "Vampire Diaries" or "Game of Thrones" - as a kind of fantasy soap opera - but notched up several altitudes.

Trying to remove the flavor of polytheism from the Forgotten Realms campaign setting, is about as doable as trying to remove the English language from a Shakespeare sonnet.

I'm not explaining myself well.

AFAIK, the primary draw of Forgotten Realms IS the wealth of support the Realms have. Outside of that, what does FR actually offer? It doesn't have a library of classic modules (like Greyhawk), it doesn't have a strong theme (like Ravenloft or Planescape), it doesn't have any unique hooks (like Eberron or Al-Quadim).

FR is a pretty vanilla setting. Once you take away that mountain of material, what does it actually offer me that I cannot get from any other setting? That's the point I keep trying to make.

The prime selling point of FR is the setting material. Take that away (because for me, that's not a selling point but a non-starter), and there's nothing left.

Everyone here keeps starting from the position of "I like the Realms, why don't you?" I don't dislike the Realms to be honest. I'm utterly ambivalent. I save my dislike for Planescape. But, even then, I can appreciate the aesthetics of Planescape. I could take Planescape, strip out 99% of the setting material and still run a recognizably Planescape campaign, simply by leveraging the themes of the setting. I could have a PS campaign that never travels to Sigil, uses a completely different cosmology, none of the factions, and it would STILL be instantly recognizable as a Planescape campaign.

Strip out the setting material from Forgotten Realms and I have a bog standard, stock, D&D campaign.

 

[Yaarel]

I hate to say it.

Pathfinder = Golarion

D&D 5e = Forgotten Realms

As far as WotC is concerned, Forgotten Realms is the same thing as D&D. D&D is the same thing as Forgotten Realms.



It seems to me, WotC made a financial decision to link the (relatively more popular) Intellectual Property of Forgotten Realms that WotC owns and controls, together with the Brand Name recognition of "Dungeons & Dragons" by popular culture.

The two products have merged. Now, D&D is FR and FR is D&D. In 5e, they are same product.

 

[cbwjm]

As was mentioned, it IS a thread about why FR is hated. I keep trying to get someone to sell the setting to me but, the only responses I get are either, "Well, ignore the setting material" or "don't use the setting". Neither of which is a ringing endorsement of the setting.

Maybe the issue is that none of us are marketers. We're not trying to sell the setting to you because we don't particularly care whether or not you use it.