|
So, recently I was looking at a thread about things people don't like in the Pathfinder setting (because I'm a masochist and it pains me to see people criticize things that I like), and I noticed that a lot of people were comparing it (generally unfavorably) with Forgotten Realms.
Now, I'll freely admit that I don't have a whole lot of experience with Forgotten Realms; I had the 2e boxed set back in the day and I've familiarized myself with a lot of the fluff, but I've never really run or played in a campaign that used the setting (Neverwinter Nights I and II notwithstanding). That being said, I'm a sucker for setting lore, and I can and have bored people for hours talking about RPG settings for games I've never played.
And yet, every time I try to take another look at Forgotten Realms, my eyes just sort of glaze over. Somehow, nothing about the setting really grabs me. I feel like I can usually browse a campaign setting book or wiki and fairly quickly come up with a dozen different ideas for characters or adventures, but somehow I fail to find inspiration in Faerun.
Giving Ed Greenwood et al the benefit of the doubt, I have to assume that the problem lies with me and the resources I've been looking at. So please fans of Faerun, enlighten me on what makes the Forgotten Realms setting cool, interesting, and unique.
|
|
I was talking about this thread here, though I didn't mean to give the impression that it was all (or even mostly) people saying how much better Forgotten Realms is than the Pathfinder Chronicles setting. I just noticed a couple of people saying that they liked Forgotten Realms better, which made me curious about what some people like about that setting.
I dunno, Forgotten Realms always seemed like just another "Fantasy Kitchen Sink" setting to me, just like Golarion is.
It had some cool books written IN the setting but that's not an upside to the setting itself really.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My Take on the diferences...
and please Note Ive played in almost every game world prior too the recent glut of game worlds (within the last 4-5 years)
To really Understand The Differences you must put Greyhawk as a backdrop to compare.
I would also like to say I enjoy playing in each. But each has a distinct feel to it.
This wont be comprehensive, but I will give you 5 categories where the comparison is pretty easy.
They will be-
1. General World Composition (types of countries/historical comparison/believe-ability of world
2. Availability of Magic to include high level casters.
3. Richness of Campaign Material. (this includes availability & type of background material)
4. The fit of the overall setting. (how easy the world meshes)
5. Depth of character options. (for differences)
Greyhawk vs Forgotten Realms vs Golarion
Category 1: Greyhawk is more believable than either of the other two primarily because it did not have a lot of patchwork material to it. It was rooted in fantasy, without reaching for real world. It drew on the favored worlds of the fantasy novels of the time.
Forgotten Realms drew on Earth as a reference point. Because of this it is 2nd place here. It did have a patchwork feel to parts of the world though
Golarion is a great campaign world and has something for everyone...but that is its downfall in the believe-ability category. It has a somewhat patchwork feel to it.
Category 2
Greyhawk is a low magic world. High level casters are few and far between.
Forgotten realms is a High Magic world...with high level casters around every corner and Aurora's 'magic shoppes' like having a sears catelogue in the wild west..want something? send off for it...itll be here soon.
Golarion is a better blend of both of these. Haviung a good fantasy feel to the availability, yet no stumbling over 15th+ casters on every street corner.
Category 3
Greyhawk was a very general world with few bits of detail. It was part of the old d&d syndrome that gave a loose framework for the DM to fill in 90% of the details.
Forgotten Realms was sooo detailed, I know some DM's who hated running games in it because players would rules lawyer the campaign world...ie correct what the DM had as background fluff.
Golarion seems to me to have a better handle on giving enough detail without overly producing things...giving the DM enough rope to play with.
Category 4
Greyhawk just worked. It meshed better than most campaign worlds have ever.
Forgotten realms was close to this though, having a constant backdrop that tied into each other for all the places you could go. It felt like a world.
Golarion does not mesh that well. There are parts that do, but there are also parts that have you saying huh? Here is where that patchwork feel causes problems. you have something for everyone, but how did it happen?
Category 5
Greyhawk loses hands down here. Probably because of the very reason that low magic feel worked with some campaigns and the way the world fit together...there really weren't a lot of options for backgrounds. (well there were, but they just felt cookie cutter after you played in the world for a bit)
Forgotten Realms had a huge variability here with a richness of depth for character backgrounds unprecedented...probably because of the over production of minute details that could be tapped for backgrounds.
Golarion, while a relative newcomer on the game world stage is very close to FR here.
I dont think theres one world that is better than another, it really is more about what youre looking for,.
That being said, Im firmly in the Golarion camp. (why? 2 reasons...Its easier to create adventures and meld them together with a 'working world' and because I believe in supporting the company Ive tied my horse to. ;) )
Here is something strange that takes place in both worlds Freeport (a module in Forgotten Realms) and Riddleport (the beginning of Second Darkness AP) When we ran 3.5 Freeport and then Riddle port right after, we found it strange.
I remember running a D&D game using the Forgotten Realms boxed set with a mini adventure to Myth Drannor in it. This had to be 2nd Ed, but we've used the maps and modules for 3.0
What has already been said is that there are lots of books out there set in Forgotten Realms. When people want to build a Dual Wielding Dark Elf Ranger, it isn't from Golarion. It is Dritzzt from Forgotten Realms. There are a whole series of books and they are all set in Faerun. You get to go to Shadowdale and meet Elminster. In that box, you have maps that show you where everything is at (to a certain degree).
Once you have read a bunch of books and you have all this material, it just begs to be explored doesn't it?
I have liked almost every campaign world created by TSR/WotC...Greyhawk, Blackmoor(or the known world...IE the Basic D&D game world), Forgotten Realms, Spelljammer, Planescape, and Eberron. The world of Birthright did not work for me.
Everybody will like something different...me I just like all of it...I guess that makes me some of the people in the statement, You can please some of the people all of the time'.
Also I usualy have different expecations...I don't expect to like a world 100%...I just change what I don't like.
But if you want to get in on the FR...well here is a question...what kind of world lore to you love?
If you like high fantasy with a lot of lore to read through and a variety of the D&D "classic" themes (in both good and bad), Forgotten Realms is a good setting to pick up on. While it does use a large range of common fantasy tropes, it didn't go towards too many cliches. It wouldn't have the popular appeal and never would have if that was the case. With that said, I am not sure how to spark your interest in FR...
@Dread
Define what you meant with the patchwork feel.
I'd want to avoid it when making my own campaign setting.
|
Realms was also nice because until 4e, it was a campaign setting that for lack of a better term, wasn't collapsing into a giant pile of flaming crap. It had problems, but wasn't offended to have the world get improved by all the heroes kicking around in it.
Greyhawk seemed to be suffering nigh weekly global apocalypses in 2e. Krynn (Dragonlance) and Athas (Dark Sun) were both literally post-apocalyptic settings. Birthright suffered from 'single campaign-itis' and I admittedly never played Mystara. Planescape and Spelljammer were fun, but their campaign setting was literally 'go everywhere,' so not really a good point of comparison.
Realms felt safer, generally and also had the 'advantage' of being /three/ 2e settings (Kara-Tur/Oriental Adventures, Forgotten Realms and Al-Qadim). It had an adventurer tax in one of its countries, and retired adventurers actually got to retire at high level and still sit around. It /felt/ calmer and more safe while still having tons of options.
In general, imagine 4e's 'points of light' ideal and turn it entirely around.
Personally, I got tired of it myself, partially on account of the let us say...Greenwoodian aspects of the campaign (Mary Sues all over and a propensity towards fetish) but it was one of the more solid 'basic' 2e settings.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Dread
Define what you meant with the patchwork feel.
I'd want to avoid it when making my own campaign setting.
'Patchwork feel' is when differing countries/fantasy tropes are placed within a game world and the amalgamation of the world almost feels like they were pushed in like a square block in a round hole.
An Example- The Shackles right off the coast of The Sodden lands with a perennial hurricane right there.
All three of those work in a fantasy setting, and all three are good fun. But where they are explained in the campaign setting for Golarion. Their 'fit' just feels a bit forced. The DM (and players) have to not really question it to make it work.
Imagine a Patchwork quilt, where different patches of colors are sewn together. The end result is still a blanket, and it does have a certain appeal. But, when looked at with a critical eye, you notice oddities that just don't quite work.
So if I wanted to avoid that, should I explain the history of a few adjacent regions instead of just saying "they just are there" ?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with the patchwork seems to be that things feel like entirely different universes.
In geographic terms, imagine if say you were in a desert, and then all of a sudden there were fjords and frozen icy expanses. Nothing in between, 100 degree desert here and then frozen scandavian area.
One second its camels and wispy clothing and genies and then BAM trolls, valkyries and vikings. And neither group steps over the border, almost like they were zoned in. Thats patchwork. The Shackles in Golarian feels to some people like people just posted a sign that reads 'Here be pirates.'
Thats sort of what I imagine is meant by patchwork.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can tell you what I liked about the Forgotten Realms (as of 3rd edition; I wouldn't go near 4e's, I was too pissed off they blew half of it up, and wished they had just let the setting die with the edition):
- Heavy involvement of the gods in the plot and the importance of religion. While on one hand, I don't ever want to see a world with as many gods as FR had, I still somehow really enjoyed learning of all the gods and how they influenced and interacted with the world.
- A decent amount of development of politics and culture of each region. This is not to say other settings don't have this, but it doesn't make it less of a benefit.
- Interesting racial variants and class options; in 3e I liked a lot of their organization based Prestige Classes, which I thought was a good use of the prestige class concept; likewise some of the setting-based kits in 2e, like the specialty priests of various gods.
- Because it was fairly high power setting (even if you were playing low power characters), there was a very strong "anything can happen" feel to it, which I liked. You never went, "but that doesn't make any sense, even with magic that couldn't possibly..." you just went, "well, it's Faerun, so better roll with it..."
- The 3e setting book is really well designed, IMO.
Some things to note:
- I first became familiar with it via various video games set in it (the Gold Box games, later the Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights series). They were fun worlds to explore in that context; can't put my finger on why, but it was a really fun way to learn what the setting was about.
- I did not read much of the fiction, and what fiction of it I have read, the vast majority of it was fairly recently, long after I developed an interest in it.
- My GMs who ran FR games did not run off of modules and did not use a lot of the background NPCs/characters from the fiction in the stories save as brief cameos or mentions. The most complaints I've heard about FR tend to be that the setting's canon heroes overshadowed everything, and that GMs and/or modules would just deus ex machina one of the canon characters and thus remove the PCs from possibly being the "real" heroes of the story. That to me is more of a game (module) design issue--or in the case of a GM, someone who is obsessed with a favorite character and wants to make them the star rather than the PCs, which can happen in any setting or system--but apparently FR enabled this to happen often. But as I never experienced that, I didn't have that sort of negative experience with it.
As it compares to Golarion... I can't say too much except yes, they both seem to be of the kitchen sink variety. I've only played in a few Golarion-set games now and am still learning it. By the time I was aware of Golarion, I had already been working on developing my homebrew setting, so had no interest in running a game in someone else's, and it was awhile before I found a GM who wanted to run in Golarion.
But as it is, I don't see it as "which setting is best" or "which should I play in"? There should be no competition here. If you like multiple settings, play in them. If you have one you prefer over others, play in that. No big deal. Me, I'm in one Forgotten Realms campaign (3e setting with Pathfinder rules), one Golarion-based campaign, and I'm running a game set in my own world. Enjoying all three just fine, don't feel there has to be a reason why I shouldn't.
|
|
I dunno, Forgotten Realms always seemed like just another "Fantasy Kitchen Sink" setting to me, just like Golarion is.
It had some cool books written IN the setting but that's not an upside to the setting itself really.
I tend to agree, with the caveat that a setting having depth and history is something that only comes with time. Forgotten Realms is a great setting that grew over time.
Golarion is a young setting with a lot of potential.
I would argue neither is "better" in the same way that one can't really argue your favorite meal is better than someone elses favorite meal.
It is personal taste.
I was a Forgotten Realms fan back in the day. I remember being disappointed when Eric Boyd and others really felt the need to fill out this turgid history of the Realms instead of providing playable material. I mean, I liked the lore, but I didn't really feel the need to know that Volo met a drow who may or may not have been Drizzt while stopping off for a ham sandwich at an inn someplace. And the level of magic did get a little out of hand at times, especially for older gamers raised on Greyhawk...that said, The Realms are like a great salad bar; take what you want, and leave the rest.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So if I wanted to avoid that, should I explain the history of a few adjacent regions instead of just saying "they just are there" ?
If you wanted to avoid that, then make sure the changes make sense and are gradual.
Don't put Ustilav (Gothic Horror) next to Belkzen (Orc run nation) ;)
I Enjoy Golarion...But I Enjoyed Forgotten Realms too.
|
It all depends on what your looking for. FR is my least favorite, as It always seem to have a high powered mage behind every tree, so to speak.
Greyhawk is hands down my favorite, but it takes work. But it does very well and has lasted the test of time.
Golarion while has lots of options, suffers from the patchwork problem. It doesn't mesh. Here be pirates. Here be ninjas and samurai, here be Vikings, and over here are the devil worshipers next to the freedom lovers next to the crazy folks from galt. As an entirey it doesn't work for me. In parts, works great.
|
Well...
Midgard is ley line magic and warped alchemical experiments; the Western Waste’s giant, shambling horrors and magic-blasted landscapes; diabolical gnomes and the schemes of immortal Baba Yaga; wild, wind-riding elves and swashbuckling minotaur corsairs; the Mharoti Empire’s lethal assassins and exotic splendors; and the dragon-haunted crags of the icy Northlands.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the subject of the Realms, the huge volume of lore can seem insurmountable to outsiders. But there is some really great stuff out there, particularly if you like your RPGs roleplay heavy and the concept of a living, breathing world.
For the best stuff, I advise exploring a lot of the 2nd edition material if you can find it. The Volo's Guides might make good (and fun intros). And whilst Ed Greenwood's novels are fairly obtuse (for my taste) and Spook205's Mary Sue/fetishistic criticisms do hold water, I always found his sourcebook writing incomparable; stock full of adventure hooks plus all kind of additional details which give the Realms such depth. Steven Schend's sourcebooks on Calimshan, Amn and Tethyr were also excellent.
The Realms is so vast, both in terms of history and scale, and as a result of lot of dross has crept in, but 'the Heartlands' created straight from Ed's pen hang together very nicely. Of course, so much of the appeal is in the history, lore and incidental details. As a DM, I find this all actually feeds my imagination when creating adventures, and enjoy the challenge of slotting my own ideas into the existing collage of canon. If you prefer a blank slate to scrawl your adventures on, then the Realms is going to be a challenge.
P.S. Ed Greenwood's 'Forging the Realms' articles on the Wizards website (easily googled and free to access) might also be good starting points to get the flavour of the place.
Ok i have to ask, what did the 4E did to the forgotten realms?
(i am not trying to flame or anything, i am just curious since i haven't really touched the 4E FR)
|
|
Well...
** spoiler omitted **
Generally my issue isn't 'Vikings and Genies' since our own world exhibits similar diversity. Its more plopping them right next to each other higgly-dee-piggly and expecting their cultures to still behave the same way. If your Greco-Roman Empire with pillars and philosophers in togas is right next to 20th Century France with automobiles and little cafes well...thats going to stand out and make your campaign setting feel kind of weird. Having it be a distance away feels more reasonable. Not everyone's at the same development level, but having neighbors be at wildly dispariate levels without good reason is a big weirdo thing.
Ironic since Realms usually did ok with it, Rashmen and Thay always kind of bugged me with this, since you have cosmopolitan world-power Thay next to Barbarian Tribeland.
I'll use a cartoon reference to try to illustrate though, hopefully not too out there. Conan the Adventurer.
The barbarian tribes Conan was from were up against the Norseman knock offs (Kievian rus horselord style barbarians and norsemen, that scans) who also apparently shared a border with the jungle dwelling mystic warrior culture (alright now things are getting a little..weirder). So it was like 'Frozen Taiga, Frozen Fjords and then...ivy covered jungle temples.'
Ok i have to ask, what did the 4E did to the forgotten realms?
(i am not trying to flame or anything, i am just curious since i haven't really touched the 4E FR)
They blew a good portion of it up and killed a bunch of gods, and then set it several years post-blowing-up. Someone else can provide better details than that, but that's the (ridiculously oversimplified) basics of it. There was no good (IMO) story inspiration for it, it was just so they could shoehorn 4E rules into a setting first designed for AD&D and then already altered a bit for 3E, and I felt, from what I saw of it, that they strained a little too hard to keep it going.
|
I love Golarion, especially the continent of Garund. I think it makes 'Africa' into a fantasy adventure locale as worthy as any medieval European setting. Nothing in the Realms competes with that.
On the other hand, the Forgotten Realms does have a few areas that are so tremendously awesome for gameplay as to make up for the more bland 'cookie-cutter' areas (the Dales and Cormyr for example). In this vein I would put Waterdeep against any other locale in any published setting for high level adventures and if you broaden it to include the Sword Coast you have a great area for an entire campaign to play and progress. I also love the 'Empires of the Sand' (Calimshan, Tethyr, and Amn) for anyone who wants to mix in Arabian Nights while not detaching completely from the medieval European setting. Finally, Thay is about the best evil-nation ever conceived for insuring that the enemy is both ubiquitous and menacing without being overpowering for fantasy adventurers. In this sense, I think FR did better than Golarion; while I love Cheliax, I have to acknowledge that an empire actually run by Devils is a bit much for a PC party to handle.
I would put Mystara up as a very fine setting too, and one that allows novice players to really get into the tropes of this genre without running afoul of a ton of 'canon heroes' like Drizz't, Elminster, and Alias. In Mystara, halflings are hobbits and elves are elven without either being able to dominate the world with their thievery.
To sell you on the Forgotten Realms though, I would suggest you consider how tailor-made the portion of the game world your party is inhabiting needs to be. The tighter the fit required, the better Faerun is.
|
|
Re
Personally, I got tired of it myself, partially on account of the let us say...Greenwoodian aspects of the campaign (Mary Sues all over and a propensity towards fetish) but it was one of the more solid 'basic' 2e settings.
I don't disagree with the fact that there are a ton of high-level NPCs running around the setting, and I've heard stories similar to what Death Quaker described about those characters hijacking sessions and whole campaigns, though I agree that it's an issue that can easily be solved by a GM just deciding not to involve them (though if you're running a story about the end of the world, you might need to explain why Elminster isn't taking care of it instead of the PCs).
To be fair to Ed Greenwood, I don't think the preponderance of Mary Sues running around the setting is all his fault - or at least it's an unintended consequence. I met him at a con one time and kind of brought this up to him, and he was very much of the opinion that the world is yours when you choose to set a campaign there, and all of the setting elements are there for you to make your story better as you see fit. If that means killing Elminster off in scene one, so be it.
What does Mary Sue mean? I've been to every corner of the realms and I don't think I've once met a Mary or a Sue. Much less a gestalt of the two...
Ah hold on. I think I see what we're talking about
The advantage of the Forgotten Realms is just how much lore there is. It is the swiss army knife of gaming settings. There really is something for everyone. Like a swiss army knife, the tidbit you want may not be the best, but it will serve the purpose.
The disadvantage of the Forgotten Realms is just how much lore there is. It can be almost impossible to play if your players know the lore well and you do not. There can be a huge learning curve. Also, a fair amount of the information is contradictory.
As a player, I used to prefer the FR because of Eilestraee. But since they killed her, not so much. I have no idea what it says about me, but my favourite characters are mostly chaotic good drow who dance nude in the moonlight with big swords. Which is really odd because I have never had any desires in that direction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They blew a good portion of it up and killed a bunch of gods, and then set it several years post-blowing-up. Someone else can provide better details than that, but that's the (ridiculously oversimplified) basics of it. There was no good (IMO) story inspiration for it, it was just so they could shoehorn 4E rules into a setting first designed for AD&D and then already altered a bit for 3E, and I felt, from what I saw of it, that they strained a little too hard to keep it going.Ok i have to ask, what did the 4E did to the forgotten realms?
(i am not trying to flame or anything, i am just curious since i haven't really touched the 4E FR)
Changes from 3rd to 4th edition could be handled much more elegantly than they were - the 4th edition generation FR designers admitted they wrecked the FR because they didn't wanted to learn the existing lore. Yeah, they decide to continue the setting without using the setting...
As a player, I used to prefer the FR because of Eilestraee. But since they killed her, not so much. I have no idea what it says about me, but my favourite characters are mostly chaotic good drow who dance nude in the moonlight with big swords. Which is really odd because I have never had any desires in that direction.
Eilistraee was awesome, even before Drizzt became a thing!
|
|
Changes from 3rd to 4th edition could be handled much more elegantly than they were - the 4th edition generation FR designers admitted they wrecked the FR because they didn't wanted to learn the existing lore. Yeah, they decide to continue the setting without using the setting...
Really?! Can you link to that? I want to read it in all of its original stupidity.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They blew a good portion of it up and killed a bunch of gods, and then set it several years post-blowing-up. Someone else can provide better details than that, but that's the (ridiculously oversimplified) basics of it. There was no good (IMO) story inspiration for it, it was just so they could shoehorn 4E rules into a setting first designed for AD&D and then already altered a bit for 3E, and I felt, from what I saw of it, that they strained a little too hard to keep it going.Ok i have to ask, what did the 4E did to the forgotten realms?
(i am not trying to flame or anything, i am just curious since i haven't really touched the 4E FR)
Realms have a long-standing tradition of getting cataclysmically blown up for edition changes. I think part of the reason people got so angry about the 4th Ed. blow-up was because many of them had hundreds of dollars worth of setting material that was suddenly completely invalidated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a player, I used to prefer the FR because of Eilestraee. But since they killed her, not so much. I have no idea what it says about me, but my favourite characters are mostly chaotic good drow who dance nude in the moonlight with big swords. Which is really odd because I have never had any desires in that direction.Eilistraee was awesome, even before Drizzt became a thing!
Hate to break this to you but Drizzt became 'a thing' before Elistraee was a gleam in a designer's eye. Though Elistraee is much more awesome than Drizzt.
|
|
I think part of the 4e explosion was also that the realms were cosmopolitan, and 4e really likes its asinine 'points of light' idea.
I for one, don't see a huge loss in Elistrae. She was the goddess of good drow, that was basically it, the rest of the elven pantheon had stuff to account for redemtption and the like.
Also the whole 'drow beauties dancing naked under the moonlight' thing was a little fanservicey.
While I overall dislike 4e's hack and burn approach to Realms, and I did like playing in the Realms, Realms had the sticky fingers of Greenwood all over it. Elminster banging the goddess of magic and his six surrogate daughters stands out in my head as something I always wanted the brain bleach for. It seemed like you couldn't throw a flaming cat without hitting something a little...M-rated.
Changes from 3rd to 4th edition could be handled much more elegantly than they were - the 4th edition generation FR designers admitted they wrecked the FR because they didn't wanted to learn the existing lore. Yeah, they decide to continue the setting without using the setting...Really?! Can you link to that? I want to read it in all of its original stupidity.
Regretfully I can't. I had lost that link and many others with the loss of old computer when I had to install the system from scratch (which also led me to move from Firefox to Chrome, because chrome is much faster to synchronize with gmail account and now I don't have to worry about losing saved links).
I think that it was one of the freely accessible articles for Dungeon or Dragon and as far as I can recall was written by one of the people who was involved with Forgotten Realms since the start of 4th edition but not before. He wrote something to the effect that they can't expect game material writers to learn all the already accumulated Forgotten Realms lore (because there is so much of it) so they decided to move the timeline 100 years in the future and cut away various things.
|
|
Changes from 3rd to 4th edition could be handled much more elegantly than they were - the 4th edition generation FR designers admitted they wrecked the FR because they didn't wanted to learn the existing lore. Yeah, they decide to continue the setting without using the setting...Really?! Can you link to that? I want to read it in all of its original stupidity.Regretfully I can't. I had lost that link and many others with the loss of old computer when I had to install the system from scratch (which also led me to move from Firefox to Chrome, because chrome is much faster to synchronize with gmail account and now I don't have to worry about losing saved links).
I think that it was one of the freely accessible articles for Dungeon or Dragon and as far as I can recall was written by one of the people who was involved with Forgotten Realms since the start of 4th edition but not before. He wrote something to the effect that they can't expect game material writers to learn all the already accumulated Forgotten Realms lore (because there is so much of it) so they decided to move the timeline 100 years in the future and cut away various things.
While I can see being intimidated by some of the lore, the changes they made were pretty much guaranteed to turn off the setting's (considerable) fan base. Honestly, there are things I like about 4th edition, but Wizards somehow managed to bungle the presentation at every turn.
I'm reminded of the time one of the developers behind the 4e supposedly commented that they'd simplified the mechanics because they wanted to attract more women players and "girls don't like math". :P
|
|
I was one of the few who liked the pruning of certain gods and places in 4E. Too many places that had too many hih level pcs and too much magic. As well as too many reptitive gods. as well imo Greenwood hated changing anything. Unther is a good example. Their god king Gilgeam gets killed off by Tiamat. The god and his clergy even before his death were despised and hated by everyone in the land. Yet because of Thayan magical gun runners are somehow able to survive being take out completely Muhlrandi empire that is better liked. .
That being said I prefer FR too Galorian alot. Imo it has more of a kitchen sink feel to it then Galorion. As well as more flavor. With more realistic factions imo. How the hell does Galt not get conquered by anyone when it's in a permanent state of anarchy.
Hate to break this to you but Drizzt became 'a thing' before Elistraee was a gleam in a designer's eye. Though Elistraee is much more awesome than Drizzt.As a player, I used to prefer the FR because of Eilestraee. But since they killed her, not so much. I have no idea what it says about me, but my favourite characters are mostly chaotic good drow who dance nude in the moonlight with big swords. Which is really odd because I have never had any desires in that direction.Eilistraee was awesome, even before Drizzt became a thing!
When I saw Elistrae mentioned for the first time, I figured "Somebody decided there should be a god of renegade drow, after Drizzt became a thing. And oh, she should be hot and naked!" Thank you for validating my assumption. :)
|
I was one of the few who liked the pruning of certain gods and places in 4E. Too many places that had too many hih level pcs and too much magic. As well as too many reptitive gods. as well imo Greenwood hated changing anything. Unther is a good example. Their god king Gilgeam gets killed off by Tiamat. The god and his clergy even before his death were despised and hated by everyone in the land. Yet because of Thayan magical gun runners are somehow able to survive being take out completely Muhlrandi empire that is better liked. .
That being said I prefer FR too Galorian alot. Imo it has more of a kitchen sink feel to it then Galorion. As well as more flavor. With more realistic factions imo. How the hell does Galt not get conquered by anyone when it's in a permanent state of anarchy.
You could at least learn to properly spell Golarion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, recently I was looking at a thread about things people don't like in the Pathfinder setting (because I'm a masochist and it pains me to see people criticize things that I like), and I noticed that a lot of people were comparing it (generally unfavorably) with Forgotten Realms.
Now, I'll freely admit that I don't have a whole lot of experience with Forgotten Realms; I had the 2e boxed set back in the day and I've familiarized myself with a lot of the fluff, but I've never really run or played in a campaign that used the setting (Neverwinter Nights I and II notwithstanding). That being said, I'm a sucker for setting lore, and I can and have bored people for hours talking about RPG settings for games I've never played.
And yet, every time I try to take another look at Forgotten Realms, my eyes just sort of glaze over. Somehow, nothing about the setting really grabs me. I feel like I can usually browse a campaign setting book or wiki and fairly quickly come up with a dozen different ideas for characters or adventures, but somehow I fail to find inspiration in Faerun.
Giving Ed Greenwood et al the benefit of the doubt, I have to assume that the problem lies with me and the resources I've been looking at. So please fans of Faerun, enlighten me on what makes the Forgotten Realms setting cool, interesting, and unique.
Well, in it, the elves are really cool, and powerful, and mysterious and resilient and wise and above all, smarter than most. Then there are factions like the Zhentarim and Tethyrians which take zero s$~@ from the elves.