D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[Demetrios1453]

But your reasons aren't compelling to people who are actually answering the OP so why bring them up? I could use any setting and ignore some of the material. Anecdotal statements about never encountering the FRealms trivia master who wants to talk it up during the game don't matter to someone who has met the annoying FRealms trivia master. Feel free to go start a Why You Should Love Forgotten Realms thread. I won't post there telling you why you shouldn't.

I wasn't responding to the OP in the post you are quoting, but responding to one poster in particular. He asked why his discussions have been going around in circles and I and others have told him: we have made our case, and he has rejected our reasons, as is his right. But he's continued to ask the same questions wanting different answers, we, reasonably, don't change our answers, he rejects them again, and then starts the process over again. After a few times on this merry-go-round, we're just suggesting that the discussion is going nowhere but in circles and maybe its time to agree to disagree..

Sent from my VS987 using EN World mobile app

 

[Lanefan]

Most homebrews, despite the proud protestors pretending otherwise, would fall into generic fantasy as well.

I sincerely hope my homebrew setting falls into the 'generic fantasy' realm, as that's what it's intended to do. You'll not hear me "proudly protesting" otherwise.

The advantage of a homebrew setting, be it generic or niche, is that you're starting out without any baggage brought in from anywhere (or anyone) else. You can design as much or as little as you need, and while doing so you can bake in whatever backstory and history you like without having to account for anyone's expectations of canon.

Lan-"the disadvantage, of course, is that you have to put in the work to design it"-efan

 

[prosfilaes]

Paizo is a company manned by many former WotC staff, selling a product to many former D&D players; and yet neither group has stopped to think "hey, D&D supported multiple settings, but Pathfinder can't?"

The problem is that WotC finally learned the lesson of TSR that Paizo has known for a while; multiple settings dilute the brand and split the player base.

If the question were, why does WotC and Paizo only support one setting, these would be relevant. But it wasn't. It was why do people ask WotC to support more than one setting and not Paizo. I think my answer and the other answers answer that sufficiently.

 

[Hussar]

I wasn't responding to the OP in the post you are quoting, but responding to one poster in particular. He asked why his discussions have been going around in circles and I and others have told him: we have made our case, and he has rejected our reasons, as is his right. But he's continued to ask the same questions wanting different answers, we, reasonably, don't change our answers, he rejects them again, and then starts the process over again. After a few times on this merry-go-round, we're just suggesting that the discussion is going nowhere but in circles and maybe its time to agree to disagree..

Sent from my VS987 using EN World mobile app

Note, I wasn't expecting you to change your answers. I was hoping to get more answers. A reason to get into the Realms that wasn't a variation of, "But, it's so supppooooorrrrtttteed!!!"

But, several pages later, I can see that the only draw of the Realms is the support. Fair enough. I asked what else, and everyone gave a big old shrug and said, "Isn't that enough?"

 

[Caliban]

Note, I wasn't expecting you to change your answers. I was hoping to get more answers. A reason to get into the Realms that wasn't a variation of, "But, it's so supppooooorrrrtttteed!!!"

But, several pages later, I can see that the only draw of the Realms is the support. Fair enough. I asked what else, and everyone gave a big old shrug and said, "Isn't that enough?"

Multiple other reasons were given, but ...you ignored them. Every time. And no, I'm not going to repeat them again.

It's pretty clear you were trolling from the start.

That being the case, there isn't much else to do but give a big old *shrug* and recommend that you use something (anything!) other than the Realms.

 

[KahlessNestor]

I guess I don't get the objections over the NPCs like Elminster and Drizzt overshadowing the PCs. (And Drizzt isn't really known outside the Sword Coast. I remember Jarlaxle going east and trying ro pretend to be Drizzt and just getting funny looks).

I would actually be surprised if a world didn’t have famous adventurers of higher level than me. That doesn't take away from my story and the people and places I save.

Does Harry Potter feel overshadowed because Dumbledore is around? Is the role of Frodo and Sam somehow lessened because Gandalf and Aragorn exist? Does Daredevil or Batman decide not to put on the rights tonight because, really, Thor and Superman are around to take care of it?

Are we not allowed to write in these universes because "Harry Potter will take care of it?"

Plenty of people have managed to write greay stories and adventures in various IP universes. I play in plenty of Star Wars games. The universe is a big place, and heroes can't be everywhere at once. Others have to step up.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

[prosfilaes]

I fully expected a dodge when I wrote that and wasn't disappointed.

So, in other words, you aren't interested in understanding why other people have problems.

Poweful NPCs, mentioned or not, are relevant to the idea that they somehow make the PCs feel inferior.

That sentence is silly. You can't claim something relevant to the idea, and by using the word "somehow" say you don't know what's relevant to the idea.

The issues is some players want to play in a world where Joe the Fighter is the hero, where his name will be the one used in stories that reverberate through history. In Forgotten Realms, the feeling is that Elminster and Drizzt are the characters that the stories are written about, and the player's characters will be no one even in the fictional world, that anything they did could and would have been done by the NPCs.

they exist in both worlds unless you run a wholly unbelievable game.

I had to check; yes, yes we are in the D&D forum. The NPCs leveling at the same rate as PCs is wholly unbelievable, and barring that, E6 is more believable than 35th level NPCs running around.

18th was still enough to overshadow the War of the Lance PCs for most or all of the modules(can't remember what level the PCs finish at).

Yeah, overemphasis on level probably misses the point. As I said, the high-level good NPCs in DLA had notes that they weren't going to go out and adventure. The more activist NPCs are a problem that static NPCs aren't. There was no one in the setting that was going to take over for the War of the Lance PCs.

The vast majority of games don't even reach 10th level from all the polling released over the years. That makes the even the 15th and 18th level NPCs in the various settings one that "overshadow" the PCs.

I'd say the people who have this concern either reach higher levels or think about reaching higher levels. There's a big difference between a couple 15-20th level NPCs in a setting and more than a dozen 20-35 level NPCs in a setting. In Unther, the FRCS lists NPCs of level 30, 18, 16, and 15. If you want the PCs to oppose the Mulhorandi invasion (which I have no idea how it's happening, given the most powerful mentioned NPC in Mulhorand is 11th level), they're going to be secondary to those NPCs until they reach high level. Whereas in most settings, a small nation like Unther is not going to have a single character of 15th level, and it's likely if they do, they won't be able to get involved in adventuring. And the gap between a 10th and a 15th level character is a lot smaller than a 20th level and 35th level character.

And part of it isn't strictly about levels; it matters that you open the FRCS and the first real content is Elminister, and that the text is regularly interrupted by a half-page devoted to an NPC. It's saying that these are the characters who are important in the setting. I can't name any NPCs in Golarion or Eberron or Planescape (except the Lady of Pain) or Spelljammer, but you mention Forgotten Realms, and Drizzt and Elminister come up.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I guess I don't get the objections over the NPCs like Elminster and Drizzt overshadowing the PCs. (And Drizzt isn't really known outside the Sword Coast. I remember Jarlaxle going east and trying ro pretend to be Drizzt and just getting funny looks).

I would actually be surprised if a world didn’t have famous adventurers of higher level than me. That doesn't take away from my story and the people and places I save.

Does Harry Potter feel overshadowed because Dumbledore is around? Is the role of Frodo and Sam somehow lessened because Gandalf and Aragorn exist? Does Daredevil or Batman decide not to put on the rights tonight because, really, Thor and Superman are around to take care of it?

Are we not allowed to write in these universes because "Harry Potter will take care of it?"

Plenty of people have managed to write greay stories and adventures in various IP universes. I play in plenty of Star Wars games. The universe is a big place, and heroes can't be everywhere at once. Others have to step up.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

500+ posts in, and I can only come to the conclusion that it's such a well-worn stick with which to beat the setting that those wielding the stick not only no longer question the validity of the argument, they willfully blind themselves to any counter-arguments to that point of view. Innumerable posts have been made here pointing out that high-level NPCs can be toned down, ignored, or even outright killed off if the DM running the game so wishes, with little or no detriment to the setting itself, yet those on the other side seem to continue to state that the Realms can only be faithfully run as the Realms if such NPCs are heavily used and abused. I can only assume that they believe that if through some black sorcery some FR-loving DM actually managed to break free of this adamantine literary bond and was able to run a Realms campaign with little or no mention of these high-level NPCs, Elminster himself would teleport in with Drizzt, and the drow would hold the DM at scimitar-point until such time as this egregious error was rectified!

 

[Demetrios1453]

I'd say the people who have this concern either reach higher levels or think about reaching higher levels. There's a big difference between a couple 15-20th level NPCs in a setting and more than a dozen 20-35 level NPCs in a setting. In Unther, the FRCS lists NPCs of level 30, 18, 16, and 15. If you want the PCs to oppose the Mulhorandi invasion (which I have no idea how it's happening, given the most powerful mentioned NPC in Mulhorand is 11th level), they're going to be secondary to those NPCs until they reach high level. Whereas in most settings, a small nation like Unther is not going to have a single character of 15th level, and it's likely if they do, they won't be able to get involved in adventuring. And the gap between a 10th and a 15th level character is a lot smaller than a 20th level and 35th level character.

And, unless they are elves or dwarves, and managed to survive a magical plague and two land-altering catastrophes, and survive not dying from natural causes during the century that has passed from the time the FRCS was current, all those NPCs you mentioned, along with any other high-level NPC mentioned in the FRCS with a few exceptions, are all dead now.

 

[Shasarak]

Paizo is a company manned by many former WotC staff, selling a product to many former D&D players; and yet neither group has stopped to think "hey, D&D supported multiple settings, but Pathfinder can't?"

The problem is that WotC finally learned the lesson of TSR that Paizo has known for a while; multiple settings dilute the brand and split the player base. It creates books people instinctively don't buy (during 3.5 I bought any book that has Eberron in the title while ignoring the ones that said Realms, despite the fact I could easily use Realms stuff in Eberron). It creates turf wars where purists insist that deathtrap Dungeons and elemental cults only belong to one world. In short, unless you have a fanbase so large you can afford them to be picky, one generic setting is the best way to go.

Paizo knows this. WotC figured it out, and picked the most generic and still most well known setting to Golarionize.

Yeah, it sucks a bit, esp as an Eberron fan. But I know why they chose to do it. And I accept Faerun as a decent all-in setting. It lets me tell stories of Shakespearean Giants, liches in the jungle, demons running amok underground, etc.

So what is it? Do multiple settings dilute the brand or can 5e support multiple settings (the Forgotten Realms, Middle Earth and Primal Thule)?

It seems to me that DnD is big enough to support multiple genre and WotC owns IP that supports multiple genre. So maybe the problem really lies with the management rather then the products.