D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[Cyrinishad]

Well, yes. But this is similar to saying, "You know what? It's so funny that people don't like chocolate ice cream because they don't like chocolate. Strangely, I love chocolate ice cream because I love chocolate!"

It's how preferences work, and all that.

That said, I think there are the following "generic" dividing lines as far as settings go-

1. World v. universe. Some people prefer to talk in terms of a specific campaign world (Oerik- GH, Toril - FR), others in terms of the campaign "universe" or glue (Planescape, Spelljammer).

2. Specific v. generic. Some people prefer campaign worlds that are driven by a specific vision that changes, alters, or subverts typical D&D assumptions (Eberron, Dark Sun, Dragonlance). Others prefer some type of generic campaign world that they can drop their campaign into (FR, GH, Mystara).

3. Then comes the big generic divide- GH and FR (sorry, Mystara!). So I will create a new list of reasons why people tend to sub-group into those two categories.


a. Old school grognards v. people not yet eligible for AARP. There are those who dislike FR because they still remember Ed Greenwood as an annoying contributor to Dragon Magazine, and resent EGG being forced out of TSR. So, it's personal. FR is like a Paladin- smug, obnoxious, and never welcome. And to the younger players, GH is like the old guy complaining about how the new kids need to stop playing the loud music and get off his lawn.

b. Campaign hooks v. completists. The 1983 boxed set for GH (and, to a lesser extent, the Grey Box for FR) was famous for having so many unexplored campaign hooks. Heck- because EGG was forced out of TSR, only one small part of one continent of Oerik was even developed! Greyhawk is a place where you can plop anything, anywhere. FR has stuff, everywhere. And a wiki for it. Which some people love, and some people find annoying.

c. Consistency. Let me analogize this to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. On the one hand, it's great because every piece grow on every other piece, and you can constantly drop bits of fan service in there. On the other hand, it starts to lack internal consistency- when you're telling one story, you begin to ask yourself ... where are the other heroes? Why don't the Avengers (or others super-powerful heroes) show up when New York is being threatened by annihilation by yet another beam to the sky? More importantly, you begin to have a "stakes" issue- if every movie requires an apocalypse, then the apocalypse doesn't seem that important. That's the issue when you tell repeated stories in the same world. It's a feature, and a bug, all rolled into one!

d. Different tones. Greyhawk is very much a product of 1970s hurbermodoing. It's not a "good must overcome evil" campaign. It's more of a Conan/Lieber world, where adventurers are shades of gray, looting tombs, struggling to get by, and there are forces trying to balance the overweening ambitions of both good and evil. FR is more of a Tolkien/Reagan "Good must triumph, eventually, even if it requires a little deus ex machina." Sure, the world is open, but the stories told are those of heroes in a more classical mold. And these heroes are the chess pieces of larger forces (at least, in the published materials).

This is not an exhaustive list, and you can certainly run a GH campaign like a FR campaign, and vice versa. But GH and FR debates are, to borrow the phrase, so vicious because the differences are so small.

Yummm... Chocolate...

I think the ice cream analogy is perfect, because even though I like Chocolate Ice Cream... It's really that I just like Ice Cream, especially when you mix & match the flavors. So, I guess that puts me in the same boat as many other long time D&D fans... No matter how much I like chocolate (and I always will), it would be nice to see some other flavors on the menu.

 

[Aldarc]

It is funny but those were the two worst aspects of Eberron for me.

Would you mind elaborating on both of these points further?

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.

As both a GM and a player, I appreciate settings that maintain a sense of mystery and the unknown. What do you gain from official answers that you could not gain from discovering it in-game as a GM or a player? And let's be honest, sometimes "official answers" are disappointing in comparison with "unofficial" answers. And sometimes "official" answers completely invalidate campaigns, which is never a good feeling as either a GM or a player.

Even explicitly declared the novels as non canon (thus i never bothered to buy any of them)

Why should that matter for you?

 

[hawkeyefan]

There's another issue, for me, as well. My group uses a lot of different settings. Our gaming over the past ten years (ish) has been:

1. Greyhawk (Savage Tide Adventure Path) - largely self contained AP with all the information that you really need to run the campaign. Any additional GH material was just icing on the cake.

2. Dark Sun. (4e homebrew). -

3. Dragonlance - (5e homebrew)

4. Ravenloft - (5e Curse of Strahd) - again, self contained module where 99% of the information you could use for that campaign is self contained in the module.

5. Primeval Thule - (5e homebrew with modules) - The setting only has one guide book. Not exactly a high bar of entry.

6. Forgotten Realms (Storm King's Thunder) - the first really FR adventure we've delved into in 10 years.

So, why would I go out and research all this mountain of material for a setting that I'm not going to use more than a tiny amount of my gaming time? The bar to entry is just so high that I wouldn't even know where to start. And, because I know there's that mountain of material, I have zero interest in finding out where to start.

I don't see the issue, really. Each of the 5E adventures has been self contained and had everything needed in order to run it, and any additional FR material was just icing on the cake.

How's that different?

I'm not even a huge fan of the Realms. I find both it and Greyhawk to be very basic fantasy settings. There are some cool elements, yes, but overall, they're pretty generic. But that's why they work as a game setting. It's a starting point....I can make them interesting to my players. I can pick and choose what I like and what I don't and add my own stuff until we're all happy.

It sounds to me like that's exactly what your group is doing based on your quick descriptions above. I'm sure that no one felt the need to go out and get all the Dark Sun supplements from AD&D and then the revised edition from the 2E days.

Although, if someone had all those supplements already, then sure, they could draw upon all that additional material to create some cool stories.

That's how settings should work. It's a starting point....you can do what you want with it, use what's there or don't, add your own or port stuff from other settings at will. Whatever works. As much as you like, or as little as you like.

I don't think a setting i meant to be some list of attributes to which a DM must adhere at all times.

 

[cmad1977]

I don't remember seeing any of the novel NPCs in Rise of Tiamat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fleetwood C. DeVille]

I don't think a setting is meant to be some list of attributes to which a DM must adhere at all times.

This.

There are no "Canon Police" that will take away your D&D licence if you swap campaign elements around. At one point I used "Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk" in an Eberron campaign and swapped out Iuz with Vol.

 

[Morrus]

Why FR Is "Hated"

I find it amusing that people say they don't like a brand and defenders jump up to prove why they're logically wrong not to like it.

Some people just don't like the same stuff as other people. It's perfectly normal and doesn't need a rebuttal.

 

[Mirtek]

What do you gain from official answers that you could not gain from discovering it in-game as a GM or a player?

The true answers

And let's be honest, sometimes "official answers" are disappointing in comparison with "unofficial" answers.

Yet they're inherently more valuable for me due to be official

And sometimes "official" answers completely invalidate campaigns, which is never a good feeling as either a GM or a player.

This is a feeling I could never share. It's like complaining that Flash season 3 ended differently than the fanfiction I've been writing

Why should that matter for you?

Because then to me there's ne point reading them. I could just click on fanfiction.net and waste my time for free.

I don't want to explore my own version of what caused the mourning, i want to read the official cause. If I bothered to play out my own version before I would not be disappointed to have it invalidated by the truth, I'd be thrilled to know the truth.

For me D&D as a game is and has always been secondary to D&D as a story setting that I could follow through the novels and sourcebooks. Most of the stuff I own never saw play. Last time I played D&D was in October and next time I play a short game might be October as well.

 

[Shasarak]

Would you mind elaborating on both of these points further?

A distant God is really an oxymoron in DnD. There are plenty of powerful creatures that would be happy to step in to fill that role meaning any "distant" power would be an ex-power pretty quickly.

And a frozen timeline is OK if you are just putting out a setting guide. If you want to start making splat books, adventures and novels then a frozen time line just tells me that you dont care enough about the world to even try and keep track of the things supposedly happening in it.

I find it amusing that people say they don't like a brand and defenders jump up to prove why their logically wrong not to like it.

Yeah a discussion board where people discuss things. How droll.

 

[Staffan]

Prior to Hasbro, there was not a single Forgotten Realms supplement produced.

Wizards bought TSR in 1997. Hasbro bought Wizards in 1999. In the period 1997 to 1999, the following FR books/boxes were published:

Lands of Intrigue (August 1997)
Empires of the Shining Sea (September 1998)
Powers & Pantheons (August 1997)
Prayers from the Faithful (December 1997)
FOR8: Cult of the Dragon (January 1998)
Cormanthyr: Empire of Elves (March 1998)
Villains' Lorebook (July 1998)
The City of Ravens Bluff (October 1998)
Demihuman Deities (November 1998)
Demihumans of the Realms (January 1999)
Skullport (June 1999)
Sea of Fallen Stars (August 1999)
Drizzt Do'Urden's Guide to the Underdark (November 1999)
Calimport (October 1998)
Undermountain: Stardock (January 1997)
Castle Spulzeer (October 1997)
Four from Cormyr (November 1997)
Hellgate Keep (February 1998)
For Duty and Deity (May 1998)
The Fall of Myth Drannor (June 1998)
The Accursed Tower (March 1999)
Wyrmskull Throne (September 1999)
Kidnapped (August 1998)
Forgotten Realms Interactive Atlas (September 1999)

I mean, 24 is pretty close to 0 in the grand scheme of things, but it's not nothing.

How, exactly, did they chose the FR as their main focus for books in 3e prior to Hasbro when they did not produce a SINGLE FR book, supplement or product until TWO YEARS AFTER Hasbro acquired WotC?

Or, did you mean after the Hasbro acquisition?

Of course they didn't produce any 3e FR books before Hasbro bought Wizards. Without a time machine, that would be impossible, because Hasbro bought Wizards before 3e was published. But there were FR books published before the FRCS (Monsters of Faerûn, Pool of Radiance: Attack on Myth Drannor, and Into the Dragon's Lair), and as I showed above a lot of books produced before being bought by Hasbro. And in the lead-up to 3e's release, Wizards were pretty clear that Greyhawk would be the "core" setting, meaning that it would be used to provide gods and some concepts for core 3e books, but that Forgotten Realms would be the setting that saw a lot of specific support.

Oh, and this is what Peter Adkison had to say about the future of various D&D settings about a month after the acquisition of TSR. This was of course very early and a lot of the things he says here were later changed, but it shows that having FR front and center was always the plan:

TSR PRODUCT LINES

Of course, everyone wants to know which product lines we plan to support
aggressively and which we plan to keep low key for possible revivals
later on. Overall we'll base these decisions on consumer interest, which
is typically expressed in sales. Here's a summary of where we stand on
the key lines:

AD&D core, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance(R): These are great product
lines with strong sales. We'll certainly continue to invest in these.

Planescape(R), Ravenloft(R): These are great product lines, but with
modest sales. We believe they can be managed profitably and we plan to do so.

Birthright(R), Spellfire(R), Dragon Dice(R): These lines are built on
intriguing concepts, but sales have been weak. We have some ideas to try
out during the second half of this year to build up these lines. If those
ideas don't work, we'll let the lines slip into hiatus for a while and
consider relaunches at a later date.

Greyhawk(R): There seems to be a lot of pent-up demand for bringing the
Greyhawk line back. We're giving this serious consideration.

Alternity(TM): This is an amazing product with great potential. We're
delaying the launch till 1998 so it can get better marketing support. As
a gamer you may not value marketing, but as a publisher I can tell you
that the days of launching a new game and hoping it grows on its own are
long gone. If this game is going to have the chance it deserves, it's
going to have to come out with a well-planned launch program.

Dragon, Dungeon(R), Polyhedron(R): These are excellent publications that,
even though they don't really make money, are important products for
supporting TSR customers and products. We'll continue all these magazines.

Novels: The book publishing department at TSR is an excellent, efficient
operation that produces some outstanding fiction. We'll continue to
invest here; the novel lines will generally overlap with the game lines,
with occasional exceptions.

Dominia(TM) Campaign Set: Of course, we're seriously considering
publishing an AD&D campaign setting for Dominia, the multiverse in which
the Magic: The Gathering(R) TCG is set.

Other lines: Some other TSR properties aren't currently supported but are
mentioned frequently in emails and such from gamers; the Dark Sun(R) line
is an excellent example. We'll do some market research to test awareness
and interest, and we'll consider relaunch options based on those studies
and our own thoughts about where we think the exciting prospects are.

 

[aco175]

I actually like the fact that there is so much written about FR. When planning my adventures I find it easy to hop on Google and look for the areas I want to use and get some ideas to flesh out. I always feel free to change and modify things, but having several ideas makes my job easier.

I haven't played in FR for many years and homebrewed or things were contained to the region we played. We played some of the adventure paths in 3e and 4e, but never felt we were playing Greyhawk. In 5e I got back into FR by playing LMoP like many people I would guess. When that ended, I expanded the region and made things up to include ideas on Leilon being explored, The Place of the Unicorn, and trips to Southcrypt. I found very little written on these locations but had enough to get some ideas. 6 levels later the PCs are heading back to Phandelver and I just added some more local sites and a big threat using the underground lake in the mines.

Is it FR? I guess. We use the maps and gods, but a lot of the big names are missing. I have some of the trading costers and sinister groups like Iron Throne and Cult of the Basilisk. A cult of Orcus showed up, but it could be any demon-lord.