D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Maxperson]

So, I'm going to quibble with this a little.

Let us assume that WoTC is owned by Hasbro.

Let us further assume that Hasbro likes making money.

Let us further assume that a great way to make money is to monetize IP.

Let us further assume that one of the great ways to make money right now, when monetizing IP, is to create "shared cinematic universes." So much so that we have the Marvel Cinematic Universe (and TV shows), the DC Universe (and Arrowverse), the Universal Horror Universe (Tom Cruise is THE MUMMY ... or, in the Mummy, or something), and even the Hasbro Cinematic Universe (really ...).

If these assumptions are true, then it would follow that TTRPGs are just a pleasant side business for Hasbro. The real money would be in making some money off of the IP. Keep the TRUE FANS(tm) engaged and happy so they can evangelize a later property, but otherwise ... whatever.

So, if you take these assumptions as true, then it necessarily follows that you need a shared universe that is IP ready for the future. Some of them are too specific (Dark Sun, Eberron). Some of them are too weird to launch (Planescape, Spelljammer).

You need a generic fantasy campaign. Which pretty much leaves the two major ones - GH and FR.

With FR, you already have a base of familiarity due to the computer games and numerous novels. For better or worse, it is the better IP to develop- because there's already so much cruft out there.

In short, it's entirely a business decision. Unfortunately, TTRPGs are just a rounding error for Hasbro at this point. We are the tail, not the dog.

So you think that WotC was lying when it said that FR is overwhelmingly the most liked setting? And that they chose the FR as their main focus for books in 3e(prior to Hasbro) for the hell of it?

 

[jasper]

Ok since some of you mentioned it, what exactly is canon for 5E FR? Please point to hardbacks, AL, or official documents stating what is canon. Links to Amazon for source material would be helpful too.

 

[jayoungr]

Because they only work when you cut out a very small part of it and ignore the rest. But when you look at the big picture it does not make sense at all ...

If the world is so large that none of that other stuff has any impact on the campaign at all, then the PCs feel small and unimportant. By the time I hit level 20 in a game, I expect to have seen just about everything worth seeing in the world.

As I suspected--expectations. Both of those considerations carry exactly zero weight with me and my group. And we've definitely never felt "small and unimportant."

(Not saying you folks don't have a right to your opinions, of course.)

If I can save the entire world without ever leaving my home region, then presumably someone in the next region can also save the entire world without anyone over here finding out about it.

That would never even occur to my group. For me, it's like complaining that Godzilla always attacks Tokyo. The story is where the characters are.

*shrugs*

(For the record, I'm not a Forgotten Realms junkie, but I don't have anything against it either, and the fact that it's "kitchen-sink" does not bother me at all.)

 

[Mirtek]

What you describe as Eberron's "dead" setting is what makes it feel alive to me: there is so much tension in that moment in the timeline that one could have a decade-long campaign or hundreds of smaller campaigns and still not explore all the issues at play in Khorvaire or Eberron at this moment.

And that's THW difference between us and to a large degree between those two fanbases at large: I want official answers, not my own answers from my campaign.

The timeline has only advanced by a year so far, and that is in no small part because of (1) Eberron's still relative newness as a setting at the time 4E came out, and (2) the tremendous pushback following the advancement of Forgotten Realms's metaplot in 4E.

At release they actually said to never advance at all. Way before 4e was even thought of.

Was supposed to be one of THW seling points of the new setting. Even explicitly declared the novels as non canon (thus i never bothered to buy any of them)

 

[guachi]

I disagree that the problem is "metaplot". I think the issue is "too much metaplot".

When you have adventures and novels and organised play games and comics and video games that are all effectively canon and fighting to define what actually happened to certain people or gods or places then that's an issue. At that point, the problem isn't that events occurred and the world progressed, it's that too much was happening and it was impossible to keep track.
It's the quantity and quality of the metaplot and the world events.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, too much cruft. I'm sure there were people who loved to follow all this stuff. It You certainly see it with comic books and Star Wars. But when Star Wars wanted to do sequels, they jettisoned all of it and set it aside as some kind of alternate reality. It appears to have worked well enough.

As far as I'm concerned, anything that happened to the Realms outside of adventures should not be canon.

With two APs a year, they could slowly change and tweak things in the Realms. Especially since if Good wins in half of them, nothing in the world is altered. Just Tyranny of Dragons, Rage of Demons, and Storm King's Thunder have any noticeable impact. And the effects of the last one will likely be "fixed" after a year or two in-world.
The lore and metaplot is going slow enough that you can keep up.
The metaplot means it's a living, growing, changing world. Which can make it feel more "real" as history is unfolding.

This is the kind of metaplot I could handle, one where the adventures actually change things in setting. If I'm playing D&D, the only thing that should affect the world are things that occur in the D&D game. The MCU is its own separate thing. The FR book-universe should be its own separate thing from the FR-game universe.

I think it's why I like Known World so much. The only novels occurred at the end of the setting's run and there weren't too many of them. The rest of the setting incorporates events from the modules or mentions how to incorporate the events from modules. This makes the game central, not some external actors in books.

 

[Mercule]

With FR, you already have a base of familiarity due to the computer games and numerous novels. For better or worse, it is the better IP to develop- because there's already so much cruft out there.

In short, it's entirely a business decision. Unfortunately, TTRPGs are just a rounding error for Hasbro at this point. We are the tail, not the dog.

I absolutely think that WotC/Hasbro should monetize the crap outta the Realms. I'd just prefer that they actually branded it as "Forgotten Realms". D&D is a medium. The Realms are an IP with story, etc.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Derren]

The problem with the metaplot is that the NPCs and novel protagonists are doing exactly the same thing than what the PCs are supposed to do and often do it better because of plot armor.
The metaplot is basically in competition to the PCs.

Compare that to the metaplot in Shadowrun (which also isn't without criticism and many GMs ignore it). The metaplot is mostly driven by corporations, hugely powerful entities like great dragons and free spirits or just happen. And the PCs are not supposed to solve those problems. They do not go out to slay Lofwyr or compete with a megacorp. Instead they use the current events to get work for money and maybe idealism. But at no point does the metaplot or any of its protagonists do the things the PCs are supposed to do as they operate on a completely different level. Instead the metaplot provides the DM with different reasons for Runs than the usual "company A wants something company B has".

In D&D/FR though the PCs are supposed to save the world which is exactly what the NPCs are doing too.

 

[Kramodlog]

I can say what people like about it and from those I can guess what people do not like.

What is liked:

1- Details. The FR is the most detailed setting. Greenwood gave TSR a rich setting with a long history and dept. No setting has come close to it, although there was a desire to recreate this dept with Eberron.

2- Diversity. Everything and nothing is the FR.

3- Support. The FR evolved and aged. It made the setting alive.

What people do not like:

1- Details. Some DMs feel that too much detail in a setting stiffules their creativity. Some also feel pressure to respect the canon history of a setting and some players also add to that pressure. Some people just want a map.

2- Diversity. There is too much stuff to manage in the FR. Some people will feel they can't, to name one example, have a post-apocalyptic setting with low technology and magic in the FR. Logically, tech and magic would leak into that pot-apocalyptic zone rapidly.

3- Support. The FR changed too much over the years and there is too much info to track, not counting the world shacking events that happen too often and have lost meaning. Again, some people just want a map.

I'm sure other settings would get as much hate as the FR, if only those settings would have been as wide spread and used as the FR. Ravenloft was rebooted too many times and they didn't always bothered to explain the changed in setting, but Ravenloft was a niche setting. Dark Sun was awesome, but was rebooted with the first series of novels and the setting never managed to get its act together after that. It also struggled to produce rich flavorful material. But again, it was just too niche for have a critical mass of haters. Planescape was rich, but it never did have coherent creative vision or a central map that could give players a mental image of the setting. Etc, etc.