Why the hatred towards FRCS?

[Voneth]

For me, "hate" would be too strong a word. A lack of interest would be more accuarate, though the same goes for Greyhawk, Kaladamar, and etc. as well.

Both are a cosmopolitan, eurocentric, middle age setting and after more than 10 years of gaming, that's something I can homebrew blind folded.

Perhaps if I had more money and less time, I would be interested in purchasing such a campaign, but then I would have the option to do so from hundreds of similar products that have been on the market for years as well as the glut of d20 gameworlds that also sell a cosmopolitan, eurocentric, middle age setting.

When I've been drawn to a setting, it's been for something with more originality, such as a Dark Sun, Planescape, or Spelljammer. But as we all know the originality of these settings didn't exactly induce market profitabilty. Which on second thought may be the reason why some may pick on FR for it's popularity.

I've talked to some who are frustrated that their personal favorites that have had more originality, such as Dark Sun, where ignored by the gaming public while "a dime a dozen settings" such as FR, GW, and RK were gobbled up. If you put yourself in their shoes, you could probably understand where they are coming from.

At one time, I was even more frustrated than them, trying to find players who were not only interested in a more unique setting, but were also interested in something other than 2nd ed. Let's just say that I wish 3rd ed. had come out like 5 years earlier.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

To the people who say "Hey, I solve the FR problems by modifing it." I don't fully understand. Why buy a product that you aren't going to fully use when there are other d20 fantasy products out that don't have those problems?

Well, first, I would not say I don't use it all. Even if I tweak some of it, I still use it. And I enjoy reading all of it.

Second, I have yet to find a product out there that doesn't "have those problems". My experience is that most 3rd party products need to be closely scrutinized to make certain that at least they know the rules. And even if they do, you still have to take the author's view and consider how it meshes with your own.

Take Relics and Rituals for example. I think it is a great book. They know the rules. But Scarred Lands has a very distinct feel to it. While I would not hesitate to play a game set in this world, it is not the way I see MY world that I like to DM for. So I am back to the same deal of "modifying it". So it is not just high power that forces you to modify.

As a side note, my one gripe with R&R is that the amount of "flavor" text is way to high. It strikes me as more of a "page count padding" text. I would rather have a spell that I feel I need to work on than a narrative that doesn't add to my game at all.

Lastly, working with someone else rules to make them your own can be part of the fun.

 

[Holy Bovine]

To the people who say "Hey, I solve the FR problems by modifing it." I don't fully understand. Why buy a product that you aren't going to fully use when there are other d20 fantasy products out that don't have those problems?

SImply because there is no perfect setting. A perfect setting would only be one you made yourself becasue it would be perfect for you.

What's perfect for you will never be perfect for me. FR does have tons of good stuff (along with the bad) that can be lifted out and placed into a homebrew or other published setting with ease. Dungeons, taverns, cities, heck I've even seen a guy put the whole of Myth Drannor into his campaign and re-worked the history somewhat to fit his homebrew game.

D&D should always be about stretching your imagination in creating new settings and finding new and exciting ways to adapt the old ones.

 

[uv23]

I have mixed feelings about the realms. The 3e FRCS is a very nicely written and formatted book and I thoroughly enjoy the sections on geography and history. Foundation is a good trhing and just like a good novel, lots of detail is fine as long as its interesting detail.

I do agree though with some arguments that have been stated here. Namely that the overall power level is too high, too much direct intervention from powerful folks, and I really really dislike the historical earth bits i.e. egyptian pantheons, ties to the real world and dinosaurs especially. That stuff has no place in a distinct fantasy setting IMO and makes the FR seem cheap in a way.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Voneth,

I think you have some very good points. However, the economics of the game simply won't support you very well.

Even if FR suddenly ceased to exist, the cash pool to support a well done Dark Sun just is not there.

Planescape seems to be feasible, but only barely.

Nothing will ever get the "quality" support that a semi-Tolkein Euro-fantasy will.

If other people want to slam FR just because their pet setting is not as popular, then they seem silly to me. It is like saying that baseball is a dumb game just because you prefer professional Lacrosse to MLB.

 

[Henry@home]

I agree with the statement that FR products have some of the best production values aout there - and those kinds of productions values would look as good on some Greyhawk products - but then, thats a thread of a different red, orange, and yellow color.

FR I personally have come to enjoy ever since being truly introduced to it by a DM of my acquaintence back in December of 2000. WE have been running that game on and off for over a year now, and may yet start it back again in March. Like any other fantasy world, it is fun if run by a DM with attention to detail.

The only thing that Forgotten Realms does NOT handle well is world-shaking Epic plotlines that threaten nations and geography - if things get that bad, there is no reason why one of the two dozen powerful good wizards do not step in and take care of business. Let's face it - will there ever be a plot big enough to tie up The Simbul, Khelben Arunson, Laeral, Maskar Wands, Malchor Harpell, Storm Silverhand, Alustriel, Vangerdahast, Caladnei, Cadderley of Deneir AND Elminster, all simultaneously? The world-saving scenarios where the PC's are the only hope are quite hard to explain plausibly.

Smaller plotlines, threatening, say, a city, or an invading force that threatens a town, is more the style of forgotten realms. Plus, one never runs out of ruins to explore!

 

[BiggusGeekus]

In response to the many replies...

I'm not really talking about minor modifications. Those are, as folks have noted, desirable and in a sense mandatory. If everyone plays, for example, a ranger then you can't simply start everyone in one of the forests and expect things to go smoothly. I'm talking about many posts I've seen where people will say "My campaign is in the FR, but I've totally changed things!"

Look, if people are having fun that's all I honestly care about. If you're happy, I'm happy. I'm just left feeling a little confused.

 

[Holy Bovine]

BiggusGeekus (Love the Avatar by the way - Fiery Phoenix!!)

Maybe they just like the maps?

I understand what you're saying now and i would have to agree with that. Just using place names without any of the background provided would seem like a waste of money. i can get place names from any world atlas - its the interesting settings & places that I look for when I'm swipin' stuff from the Realms.

And some of the new rules intorduced in the FRCS hardback look really great but $60+ (CAN) is a big chunk of change to drop for a few rules & some neat place settings.

 

[Altalazar]

For me, though I like the supplements, and use bits and pieces of them, I've never run and likely never would run a full blown FR campaign.

I think it is for me the same reason I probably will never play Star Wars - it just feels like the important things of the world are already done or destined to be done and so you know that no matter what you do, you are always a minor player. And the direction the world will take is entirely out of your hands - other heroes will be doing the world shattering things. Everything else is just filler.

I like an open-ended world, one where finding anyone above 10th level is very rare - where the smallest of people have the potential to have the greatest of impacts on the history of that world.

In well defined worlds, like FR and Star Wars, it can feel like you are permanently a pawn.

 

[d20Gurus.com]

Well, I'm running an epic-scale FR campaign, and the PCs are playing an important part.

If any of you have read the new Troy Denning Books (Archwizard trilogy), then you would know that most of the Chosen of Mystra have either dissapeared or have gone into hiding.

Also, I made the Dark magic Mythal which surrounds Everska impermeable by people who arent touched by the shadow weave, effectively trapping Khelben and Laeral inside.

Elminster is in Hell. He will not be coming back any time soon.

Vangerdahast is too busy handling the "invasion" of Tilverton to care about what is happening in the north.

All in all, most of the major players are tied up in other things, leaving the seemingliny unimportant (yet world shaking) events to the party. All this serves as a backdrop for an epic adventure, and it doesn't destroy the flavor of the realms.

For some reason, Realms brings the best out of my group. We see better role playing with the characters they have here than I have in any other setting. I think It has to do with the massive amount of detail given to every aspect of the world. With so much to play off of, it's easy to remain in character.

Not to say I do not have my own homebrew worlds that I like better (read my other thread), it is just that Forgotten Realms is the best WotC has to offer now (especially since planescape is dead).