Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Majorafire77 11-05-05, 09:47 AM	Does anyone else feel that FR has been defined a bit too much, to the point where it is impossible for new players to join in without reading tons of novels and sourcebooks? Half of that information is inaccessible anyway, considering that most of it isn't even still being produced. Every single part of the world seems to have 50,000 NPCs that haven't even seen print in the 3.x sourcebooks. I don't think that anyone (even the so-called veterans) can run a game of FR with the knowledge that they did not screw up and contradict the material in some aspect of the game. With WotC producing new fluff and material at least once every few months, I think the already bogged-down FR is sinking. Am I just imagining this problem, or do any of you agree? EDIT: I had not realized that all of the information from 2nd edition was available at RPGNow (http://www.rpgnow.com/default.php?cPath=_1_294_308&) (that's all of them, right?), so I guess the sourcebooks aren't as hard to get as I thought. But the fact that the novels are hard to find and that there is still literal tons of information out there for FR remains true afaik.
Slime Lord 11-05-05, 09:55 AM	Yes and No. Yes - Because there is SO much information in the Realms. One of it's turn ons to readers and players. It's detailed, alive (and undead) and all the above. No - Because there are books out there to help you get to know the Realms, such as the one I unknowingly picked up four years ago - The Nether Scroll. That is how I was introuduced to Realms (and DnD for the most part). Ever since then I've came to boards and picked up other novels learninga bout things.
Cainan 11-05-05, 10:07 AM	I'd rather have too much fluff than too little. A group can always pick up just the campaign setting and run a game and make up their own details. But for people like me, that love detail and love reading stories about the people of the Realms, the more fluff the better. I love how each sourcebook is entertaining to read and isn't just crunch. Keep pumping out the details and I'll keep buying the books. I've played settings in other games where there was basically no metaplot and it really started to bum me out. Exalted is a good example. I love the game and the settle is beautiful and wonderfully detailed. But the lack of a true metaplot and fluid timeline of events, it feels like when you're not playing the game, everything is too static. I like being able to read about the world around me changing and growing when I am not RPing at the time. It makes the world feel alive.
Zevox 11-05-05, 10:35 AM	No, for 2 reasons: 1. New players don't need anything more to play in the Realms than they do to play in any other setting. Pick up the FRCS or Player's Guide to Faerūn and start playing, just making things up as you go if you don't have detailed info on any given topic. All the novels and sourcebooks made for it just give that much more detailed information for those of us with the time, money, and desire to get them and use them (though the novels also serve the purpose of entertaining a number of us). If new players think otherwise, they've merely not thought it through enough. 2. Theres no such thing as too much fluff :P . Zevox
Kuje31 11-05-05, 10:56 AM	I also don't believe there is to much lore. BTW, I hate the word fluff. :) However, I can see how it could be hard for new players to get into the setting because it's a 15+ year old setting with a lot of lore scattered over 6 different mediums. Dragon/Dungeon/Novels/Sourcebooks/Polyhedron/Web Pages/etc. But, as much as I come down on people with canon lore, I toss it when it gets in the way of my setting. I only reference canon lore, usually, on the message boards because that is usually what people are asking for. So, basically use what you need and toss or change the rest. :)
Old Sage 11-05-05, 11:14 AM	So, basically use what you need and toss or change the rest. :)This is an important point to note. Simply, because the actual amount of lore available for FR after nearly 15 years presents one with some pretty diverse choices. Basically, regardless of how much published lore there is for the Realms, you, as the DM, are still free to use what you like when you like -- concentrating on expanding on core Realms concepts... or thinning them out so as not to confuse or overwhelm new players to the setting. There can never be such a thing as *too much lore*, but the DM will always have the final say on what is represented in his or her campaign and what source material is available to build the campaign with. But for the purposes of this discussion... I'd rather there be an abundance of lore for the Realms, than a severe lacking. For me, part of what makes the Realms a favoured setting, *is* the history it has in terms of published products and accessories. That I can draw upon these books whenever I wish is a luxury I greatly enjoy... I couldn't imagine it any other way.
selunatic2397 11-06-05, 09:01 PM	Fluff is a good thing as it rarely requires me to convert it to 1st edition rules. Crunchy Stuff is all those feats and such that either don't fit in 1st edition or require me to work hard to make them fit.....Hmmmm.....ponder ponder ponder...more Fluff and I'll be on :cloud9:
Majorafire77 11-06-05, 09:55 PM	Fluff is a good thing as it rarely requires me to convert it to 1st edition rules. Crunchy Stuff is all those feats and such that either don't fit in 1st edition or require me to work hard to make them fit.....Hmmmm.....ponder ponder ponder...more Fluff and I'll be on :cloud9: 1st edition? :( However, that's a good point that fluff is more useful in the long run. The problem is that the fluff is in, as Kuje31 said, is in at least SIX different sources over the period of 22 years. They really need a nice and organized compilation because all of this fluff has really gotten out of hand, especially with all of the stuff in the novels.
Cainan 11-07-05, 12:11 AM	But again, if you can't find the stuff, you don't have to use it. Think of all the stuff you don't know about as stuff that you can look forward to learning =).
Majorafire77 11-07-05, 05:53 AM	All I know is that WotC can make all sorts of money by make a consolidated source in addition to sparing their players who really want to know a lot about FR a giant pain in the ass. It will also help with the consistency of future products that introduce fluff, because WotC has never shown outstanding talent when it comes to new fluff consistency and multiple older sources with which to be consistent (then again, even with a single source they screw up a lot, such as in Eberron, but I still think it will help).
Lawless 11-07-05, 02:33 PM	Personally no. In fact I could do with less crunch, flavor text is easy to digest, rules altering stuff a hassle.
Shemeska the Marauder 11-07-05, 04:22 PM	If anything there's too much crunch. More fluff is rarely a bad thing.
Oghmanyte 11-07-05, 06:46 PM	If anything there's too much crunch. More fluff is rarely a bad thing. I agree. As far as the fluff problem goes, I must admit that I am a Forgotten Realms rules book junkie, but have read only one of the novels, and didn't find it quite to my liking. Perversely, I'm more into novels about drawing rooms and young ladies who wish to get married. Most of the fluff in my games is stuff I've invented ("Dear Drizzt, Please come to the ball of Eustace Townson, to be held at his home in one tenday" :D ) though I try not to contradict any of the details in the supplements (although there is nothing in my Faerun that has anything to do with phaerimms, which are ridiculous creatures. A giant, sunflower-faced windsock with pointy teeth? Please!) So really, you don't need to know that much about the fluff outside of what you have on hand, though it's useful to know as much as you can about that in the event you join/start a FR campaign with new acquaintances.
BrianCritchley 11-07-05, 08:56 PM	All I know is that WotC can make all sorts of money by make a consolidated source in addition to sparing their players who really want to know a lot about FR a giant pain in the ass. It will also help with the consistency of future products that introduce fluff, because WotC has never shown outstanding talent when it comes to new fluff consistency and multiple older sources with which to be consistent (then again, even with a single source they screw up a lot, such as in Eberron, but I still think it will help). consolidated source? that'd be the FRCS. it covers a bit of everything, while the other books are more indepth looks.
Majorafire77 11-07-05, 09:52 PM	consolidated source? that'd be the FRCS. it covers a bit of everything, while the other books are more indepth looks. Well of course covering a bit of everything is the purpose of a campaign setting book, but I'm talking about all of the fluff presented in say, 1987 novels.
Bloodtide_the_Red 11-09-05, 12:17 AM	No. The fluff, or better said the lore is what realy defines the Realms to me. A lot of other settings are just names and places. Sure new players are overwhelmed by all the lore. And it sure would be way easyer for them if there was say only 3 gods(one for each alignment) and six cities(one for each core race). Oh and make all the names easy, DwarfHome is the city of the dwarves, for example. The Dm gets to decide how much lore is used in the game. You can easly fight bandits in the wastelands without worring about all the lore, but it's nice to have it there to be used. This is very good for new DM's, as they don't have to make up stuff much out of the blue, they have lore to base it on. BT
theAlastorian 11-09-05, 02:43 PM	Much agreement here with what has been said in the last three pages. Fluff is good, fluff is wise. Seriously though, BG info is what a good setting is all about. The overabundance of it for FR just means that you (as the DM) have even more story hooks to draw from. Many games have tried to go the less fluffy, more crunchy path. Some have stumbled and fallen, and others (like Eberron, who to me was 90% crunch 10% rehashed story) have flourished. The Realms are just so rich and filled with beautiful stories that's it's impossible not to adore them. Though, I will admit that there have been sections of the lore that I really don't like or agree with, so they don't exist for me. ^^ There's just something about the whole thing being started by snake people that completely didn't mesh with how I saw Toril. Oh well.
Oghmanyte 11-09-05, 04:24 PM	Though, I will admit that there have been sections of the lore that I really don't like or agree with, so they don't exist for me. ^^ There's just something about the whole thing being started by snake people that completely didn't mesh with how I saw Toril. Oh well. TheAlastorian brings up an interesting problem. There's bound to be parts of Realms lore a DM doesn't like, but if an element of this lore is important to his or her campaign, he or she might feel that changing it would cause problems, either from knowledgeable players (the DM's word is final, but still...), or from his or her own (perhaps compulsive ;)) desire to work within the constraints Realms material gives. One way to work around this problem is to make the conventional lore in some way wrong. I really dislike phaerimms, but it is still widely believed by most in my Faerun that the fall of Netheril was brought about by these sunflower-faced windsocks. What only some know--including elven and human ancient historians and cultists of the Shattered Peak--, is that these monsters are pure myth, as are their foes the sharns, and that the real phaerimms were a renegade political faction of Netherese wizards, and their enemies the sharns renegade sorcerers. "Phaerimm" and "sharn" are only common-language corruptions of Netherese names for the factions, and the stories perpetuated of these creatures grow out of two things: ignorance of the Netherese language, and a very human desire to rationalize the fall of such a powerful civilization in terms that would place the blame outside the civilization itself. So--in short, it can be just as fun to take an element of Realms lore you don't like and foreground it for the purpose of debunking it, maybe even making this quest for the truth a part of the PCs' adventure.
Mr. Wilson 11-10-05, 09:38 AM	As mentioned earlier, there is no such thing as "too much" fluff. After 15 years, I expect Eberron, assuming it still exists, to have about the same amount (maybe slightly less as TSR slammed through tons of FR related material). The Fluff makes it an interesting read IMHO, as I get bored with looking at stat blocks all the time (oh, another 3rd level ftr, yeah.).
Czechmate 11-10-05, 08:44 PM	I am a new player to FR and only been playing DnD for like 6 months. I am reading up on FR almost a week now and I love it !! Altough the setting is 1 year younger then me, its all good. I recieved a time line thanx to one nice member (who name I cant remember) and it rocks. It covers everything. Altough I have a lot of practice and I dont have much free time I do what I can. I will have a FRCS book hopefully Saturday. I dont find it too hard to get info thanx to the internet, without it I would be screwed but I have it. Anyways there u have it from a newbie, it isnt too hard to get the info.
'orrible 'obbit 11-13-05, 08:15 AM	MMMm,... had to think a bit for this one (ow not something i'm used to) I think it is hard to get in as there's just so much info to digest but I still think it is a wonderful setting with the Harpers, etc alas Drizzt did lead to a whole bunch of drow clones at the time bu thats the price you pay for success. :P
Majorafire77 11-13-05, 09:33 PM	(like Eberron, who to me was 90% crunch 10% rehashed story) You have got to be kidding me... Anyway, we've established that noone thinks that FR has too much fluff primarily due to the facts that fluff defines the world of FR and that the DM can take out whatever he doesn't like about it. However, I think that the point that there is loads of fluff that are inaccessible to a newbie FR DM still stands. How is a new player supposed to get books that came out before he was even born? Should only the people who have been with the setting since it came out be entitled to the original information?
BobROE 11-13-05, 10:35 PM	You have got to be kidding me... Anyway, we've established that noone thinks that FR has too much fluff primarily due to the facts that fluff defines the world of FR and that the DM can take out whatever he doesn't like about it. However, I think that the point that there is loads of fluff that are inaccessible to a newbie FR DM still stands. How is a new player supposed to get books that came out before he was even born? Should only the people who have been with the setting since it came out be entitled to the original information? I don't see why anyone NEEDS the old information, I mean you can play the game based on the info from the 3E books (which are all still available, as far as I know). I have alot of the older stuff, and I don't refer to it in alot of cases, so it's by no means essential.
'orrible 'obbit 11-14-05, 01:41 PM	Surely a newbie of any kind would apporach it as they would any other setting. Greyhawk isn't even in print any more yet i'm sure plenty of new Dm's have heard of it and may wish to use it as a background or a spring board for their own ideas. I'm sure i played the original "Tomb of Horrors" (and it is!) in the Greyhawk setting. FR is I just think the better one because it has so many interesting places, the Underdark for example. I wonder if FR will be taken out of print? Probably not, at least not for a while.
theAlastorian 11-15-05, 12:59 PM	Yeah, I highly doubt that the Realms will go the way of Greyhawk any time soon. There are way too many folks out there who are devoted to the realms for WotC to discontinue it. And to Majorafire, about that Eberron crack, sorry if I shook your world there for a bit. I've just not been able to really get into the setting so far. A lot of it just feels like tired story elements to me. *shrug* There are parts of it that I like, and the feel of it is nice, but I just prefer the Realms. With Eberron, it doesn't feel like it lends itself to campaign games. I mean, when you're among the most powerful people in the whole of the setting at 13th level, what is left for you to do but take over Sharn and rule with an iron fist? *grin* But yeah, no disrespect to the lovers of Eberron out there, just not my game.
'orrible 'obbit 11-15-05, 01:36 PM	Yeah, I highly doubt that the Realms will go the way of Greyhawk any time soon. There are way too many folks out there who are devoted to the realms for WotC to discontinue it. And to Majorafire, about that Eberron crack, sorry if I shook your world there for a bit. I've just not been able to really get into the setting so far. A lot of it just feels like tired story elements to me. *shrug* There are parts of it that I like, and the feel of it is nice, but I just prefer the Realms. With Eberron, it doesn't feel like it lends itself to campaign games. I mean, when you're among the most powerful people in the whole of the setting at 13th level, what is left for you to do but take over Sharn and rule with an iron fist? *grin* But yeah, no disrespect to the lovers of Eberron out there, just not my game. I have to agree with theAlastorian. I like the look of Eberron but do I really want to buy another expensive supplemant? Nah, not that it's bad and I suspect if I was starting out again on D&D it might be an interesting jumping on point. I hear there's a MMORPG of Eberron coming out. Mmmmm maybe... if there's no monthly fees ! (not much chance of that!) though I must admit I've never played a game in the Eberron setting -still why not have a online role play game set in the more familiar FR setting???
Majorafire77 11-15-05, 05:34 PM	And to Majorafire, about that Eberron crack, sorry if I shook your world there for a bit. I've just not been able to really get into the setting so far. A lot of it just feels like tired story elements to me. *shrug* There are parts of it that I like, and the feel of it is nice, but I just prefer the Realms. With Eberron, it doesn't feel like it lends itself to campaign games. I mean, when you're among the most powerful people in the whole of the setting at 13th level, what is left for you to do but take over Sharn and rule with an iron fist? *grin* But yeah, no disrespect to the lovers of Eberron out there, just not my game. Meh. I can understand that there are a lot of people prefer "standard" fantasy to stuff like Eberron; after all, many of fantasy addicts out there got their love of the genre from people such as Tolkien. While I disagree with your views on "tired story elements" and think that your point on high-level characters is simply not true, I can accept that you and many others prefer FR to Eberron (even though I think FR has problems in the same way that you think Eberron does). I have to agree with theAlastorian. I like the look of Eberron but do I really want to buy another expensive supplemant? Nah, not that it's bad and I suspect if I was starting out again on D&D it might be an interesting jumping on point. I hear there's a MMORPG of Eberron coming out. Mmmmm maybe... if there's no monthly fees ! (not much chance of that!) though I must admit I've never played a game in the Eberron setting -still why not have a online role play game set in the more familiar FR setting??? Instead of spending $50 on the MMORPG, you should spend the cash on the Eberron book (and you'll still have money leftover). From the looks it, the game won't have much of an Eberron feel to it at all and will simply be decent graphics with "D&D" and "Eberron" slapped on the cover for sales. I may be wrong, but I think the money may be better spent elsewhere. As for an RPG for FR, isn't that what NWN is? Nice Eberron avatar btw :)
GothicDan 11-15-05, 06:41 PM	Marjora: Anyway, we've established that noone thinks that FR has too much fluff primarily due to the facts that fluff defines the world of FR and that the DM can take out whatever he doesn't like about it. However, I think that the point that there is loads of fluff that are inaccessible to a newbie FR DM still stands. How is a new player supposed to get books that came out before he was even born? Should only the people who have been with the setting since it came out be entitled to the original information? Meh. I'm only 20, and didn't even get into FR until 3E was almost out, and I managed to do it well enough to hold my own on these boards in terms of discussing lore, even if I'm not on the level of some of the sages here. As time goes on, however, the older books do get more and more scarce. But that's what downloadable PDFs (free or otherwise), NobleKnight, Amazon, etc., are for. :) Meh. I can understand that there are a lot of people prefer "standard" fantasy to stuff like Eberron; after all, many of fantasy addicts out there got their love of the genre from people such as Tolkien. While I disagree with your views on "tired story elements" and think that your point on high-level characters is simply not true, I can accept that you and many others prefer FR to Eberron (even though I think FR has problems in the same way that you think Eberron does). I found this kind of amusing. Because my favorite campaign setting is Planescape (which is quite far from "standard" fantasy, making Eberron look practically Tolkien-ish), and my next favorite is Dragonlance (Pre-5th Age), which may well be the most "standard" and iconic campaign setting ever made, with the exception of Greyhawk. Eberron feels too tiny, to me. It feels like there's only a really thin sheet of flavor/fluff/roleplaying covering up all of the mechanics - sparkly and attractive, but it doesn't run very deeply under the surface.
'orrible 'obbit 11-16-05, 01:34 PM	Meh. I can understand that there are a lot of people prefer "standard" fantasy to stuff like Eberron; after all, many of fantasy addicts out there got their love of the genre from people such as Tolkien. While I disagree with your views on "tired story elements" and think that your point on high-level characters is simply not true, I can accept that you and many others prefer FR to Eberron (even though I think FR has problems in the same way that you think Eberron does). Instead of spending $50 on the MMORPG, you should spend the cash on the Eberron book (and you'll still have money leftover). From the looks it, the game won't have much of an Eberron feel to it at all and will simply be decent graphics with "D&D" and "Eberron" slapped on the cover for sales. I may be wrong, but I think the money may be better spent elsewhere. As for an RPG for FR, isn't that what NWN is? Nice Eberron avatar btw :) Or what with the dollar to pound exchange rate so good at the moment,(for me), I may purchase one of those nice limited edition Eberron art prints! :D I take on all your points and they are very good ones- I'm seriously considering buying the Eberron campaign book now simply to see what the fuss is about AND gawp at the gorgeous artwork. And the notion of the warforged strikes me as a nice idea. However that is different from the need for an new campaign setting-could it be Eberron was just designed for the MMORPG?? (Ah cynical me...)
Rake 11-16-05, 01:43 PM	This is exactly the problem I have with FR. My players just aren't into Eberron anymore, and I can't run FR because I don't know much about it at all, and my players do (boy, do they). Learning FR well enough to be able to DM a Realms campaign that wouldn't disappoint my FR-expert players and/or contradict existing material would be more or less impossible for me. I've just sort of turned to using my own stuff. By the way: ...could it be Eberron was just designed for the MMORPG?? (Ah cynical me...) If this were true, MMORPG would probably, like... use some Eberron stuff. Such as, oh - I don't know - Khorvaire. Or maybe Shifters. Or changelings. Or Kalashtar. Or psionics. Or DRUIDS. (If only you knew how central druids were to Eberronian history). The MMORPG is shaping up to be something akin to "loosely interpereted D&D - with Warforged!" or some such nonsense. Pass.
BrianCritchley 11-16-05, 02:13 PM	Meh. I'm only 20, and didn't even get into FR until 3E was almost out, and I managed to do it well enough to hold my own on these boards in terms of discussing lore, even if I'm not on the level of some of the sages here. aye, I've been into FR since it went to 3E (the FRCS JUST came out when I got into it) yet I've managed to learn a fair bit of realms lore (hint: used book stores are your friend :) ) getting into a game late just means you have the distinct pleasure of slowly hunting and building up your collection from used resources. while buying the newest book can be nice, it's aprticularily sastifing to find a useful and valued gaming book you want in a used book store. I've found some real gems over the years.
Dragon Samurai 11-16-05, 02:33 PM	Does anyone else feel that FR has been defined a bit too much, to the point where it is impossible for new players to join in without reading tons of novels and sourcebooks? Half of that information is inaccessible anyway, considering that most of it isn't even still being produced. Every single part of the world seems to have 50,000 NPCs that haven't even seen print in the 3.x sourcebooks. I don't think that anyone (even the so-called veterans) can run a game of FR with the knowledge that they did not screw up and contradict the material in some aspect of the game. With WotC producing new fluff and material at least once every few months, I think the already bogged-down FR is sinking. Am I just imagining this problem, or do any of you agree? EDIT: I had not realized that all of the information from 2nd edition was available at RPGNow (http://www.rpgnow.com/default.php?cPath=_1_294_308&) (that's all of them, right?), so I guess the sourcebooks aren't as hard to get as I thought. But the fact that the novels are hard to find and that there is still literal tons of information out there for FR remains true afaik. The rules aren't set in stone. Fill in the details however you like. Why would it be bogged-down? Don't you have something called "imagination"? P.S. Dark Sun is the real campaign setting which needs fluff.
Ranger REG 11-16-05, 02:46 PM	P.S. Dark Sun is the real campaign setting which needs fluff. No, it doesn't. -- A not-a-Dark-Sun D&D gamer. :devil:
'orrible 'obbit 11-17-05, 01:24 PM	This is exactly the problem I have with FR. My players just aren't into Eberron anymore, and I can't run FR because I don't know much about it at all, and my players do (boy, do they). Learning FR well enough to be able to DM a Realms campaign that wouldn't disappoint my FR-expert players and/or contradict existing material would be more or less impossible for me. I've just sort of turned to using my own stuff. By the way: If this were true, MMORPG would probably, like... use some Eberron stuff. Such as, oh - I don't know - Khorvaire. Or maybe Shifters. Or changelings. Or Kalashtar. Or psionics. Or DRUIDS. (If only you knew how central druids were to Eberronian history). The MMORPG is shaping up to be something akin to "loosely interpereted D&D - with Warforged!" or some such nonsense. Pass. I wonder if Wotc had much input-be careful when you flog your franchise and who to, as Tom Clancy said about selling his books to Hollywood-"It's like selling your daughter to a pimp!" :D