What areas have the most/least info? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

What areas have the most/least info?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
davesaunders
Dec 14, 2008 0:35:13 I got a new player in my game and he doesnt know about the FR. Hes my cousin. He read Homeland the Drizzt book and played in the FR a few times when he started D&D back in the early 90s but said he didnt like it because he felt that things that he did didnt ultimatley matter because the DM used people like Elminster and Drizzt to fix any mistakes that they made. So he doesnt know too much about the world. He gave me a concept and stats and he asked me to give him some ideas about where he wanted to come from. Before I make suggestions to him what are the areas that have the most info about them and what areas have the least info on them? I dont know which way I want to go: pick a place with a lot of info so I can make the character a part of events which I think is cool or a place with no info so I can make as much stuff up as I want without overlooking something?
#2
sfdragon
Dec 14, 2008 4:13:47 3.x or 4e??
#3
markustay_dup
Dec 14, 2008 11:03:02 Cormyr has probably been the most detailed, with Waterdeep running a close second (or possible even the other way around). You can't really go by the number of sourcebooks for each, since a lot in one is repeated in the next edition.

As for the least, the South has only been lghtly detailed in the books of the same name, with the Golden Waters being the least of those (although a recent novel has brought it to the forefront).

The Shaar, without a doubt, has gotten the least attention of anywhere. Aside from a wee-bit in the 3e SS source, we really don't see it featured anywhere else. Even Maztica got more attention then that.

If you need something a bit closer to the Heartlands that received a bunch of attention and then was completely fogotten about, go with Hartsvale. Aside form the 2e Giantcraft source - which only showcased it, but didn't detail it much at all - and the three novels that went with the product (Twilight Giants), its been completely ignored. Its just north of the Silver Marches, above the Ice Mountains. Although it is metioned in those four produts (and placed on the 3e SM map), it has never been detailed much beyond the map itself.

Erlkazar would have also been good for much the same reasons, but it has also received some recent attention (it got Krulled).

If you want a canon 'land' that hasn't even gotten a mention, but appeared on the 1e/2e maps, go with Shaareach - its a land located next to the Misty Vale on older maps, and you can put whatever you want in there.
#4
BadCatMan
Dec 14, 2008 18:45:54 The core areas have received a lot of attention over the years: Moonsea, Dalelands, Cormyr, Sembia, Western Heartlands, Sword Coast, Waterdeep, Savage Frontier, the North. That's in sourcebooks, novels, comics, references in random other places, website articles, Ed Greenwood replies, etc

Outside that, Thay, Aglarond, Amn, Tethyr and Calimshan have also had a lot of focus.

In the middle, you get quite a lot of Realms with a sliding scale of detail and focus. Most might have only had one sourcebook to their name, and you can get by on that and the campaign setting entry. I find these are the best choices for realms to focus on, they strike a good balance between having plenty of information to work with and not enough to overwhelm, and usually only require one sourcebook to get to know well.

At the other end of the scale, there are lands that have only ever had the scantest bit of attention: Lantan, Sossal, all the lands between Chult and the Shaar, Murghom and Semphar, and others. Conversely, these usually require a lot more research to glean enough facts to go on.

Then there's the realms specifically set aside in past editions for DMs and players to mess with as they like, never to be fiddled with by designers and authors. Erlkazar, Border Kingdoms, Sembia - you can see the concept didn't last long.

And there's entire continents that were never touched: Anchorome, Osse, various nameless lands.

I'm speaking of the classic Realms, of course. For post-Spellplague, you're looking at nothing everywhere. :P

You're going to have to be more specific, as your basically asking us to rank the entire setting from highest to lowest. What's the era, the character concept, what does the player want?
#5
lord_karsus
Dec 29, 2008 10:27:44 -Waterdeep, I think, tops the list in terms of information out there about it. Cormyr has a lot, too, but Cormyr is an entire nation, whereas Waterdeep is a single City-State.
#6
thephilosopherking
Dec 29, 2008 11:56:15 I'm surprised by the lack of lore about Chondath

and the Ride/Tortured Lands
#7
rinonalyrna_fathomlin
Dec 30, 2008 14:32:17 Chondath doesn't have much information about it, true, but it was the setting of the Scions of Arrabar trilogy.
#8
thephilosopherking
Dec 31, 2008 6:26:02 does it contain details on their society, the novels I read are very poor in realmslore
#9
rinonalyrna_fathomlin
Dec 31, 2008 11:53:57
does it contain details on their society...

Yes.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 davesaunders Dec 14, 2008 0:35:13	I got a new player in my game and he doesnt know about the FR. Hes my cousin. He read Homeland the Drizzt book and played in the FR a few times when he started D&D back in the early 90s but said he didnt like it because he felt that things that he did didnt ultimatley matter because the DM used people like Elminster and Drizzt to fix any mistakes that they made. So he doesnt know too much about the world. He gave me a concept and stats and he asked me to give him some ideas about where he wanted to come from. Before I make suggestions to him what are the areas that have the most info about them and what areas have the least info on them? I dont know which way I want to go: pick a place with a lot of info so I can make the character a part of events which I think is cool or a place with no info so I can make as much stuff up as I want without overlooking something?
#2 sfdragon Dec 14, 2008 4:13:47	3.x or 4e??
#3 markustay_dup Dec 14, 2008 11:03:02	Cormyr has probably been the most detailed, with Waterdeep running a close second (or possible even the other way around). You can't really go by the number of sourcebooks for each, since a lot in one is repeated in the next edition. As for the least, the South has only been lghtly detailed in the books of the same name, with the Golden Waters being the least of those (although a recent novel has brought it to the forefront). The Shaar, without a doubt, has gotten the least attention of anywhere. Aside from a wee-bit in the 3e SS source, we really don't see it featured anywhere else. Even Maztica got more attention then that. If you need something a bit closer to the Heartlands that received a bunch of attention and then was completely fogotten about, go with Hartsvale. Aside form the 2e Giantcraft source - which only showcased it, but didn't detail it much at all - and the three novels that went with the product (Twilight Giants), its been completely ignored. Its just north of the Silver Marches, above the Ice Mountains. Although it is metioned in those four produts (and placed on the 3e SM map), it has never been detailed much beyond the map itself. Erlkazar would have also been good for much the same reasons, but it has also received some recent attention (it got Krulled). If you want a canon 'land' that hasn't even gotten a mention, but appeared on the 1e/2e maps, go with Shaareach - its a land located next to the Misty Vale on older maps, and you can put whatever you want in there.
#4 BadCatMan Dec 14, 2008 18:45:54	The core areas have received a lot of attention over the years: Moonsea, Dalelands, Cormyr, Sembia, Western Heartlands, Sword Coast, Waterdeep, Savage Frontier, the North. That's in sourcebooks, novels, comics, references in random other places, website articles, Ed Greenwood replies, etc Outside that, Thay, Aglarond, Amn, Tethyr and Calimshan have also had a lot of focus. In the middle, you get quite a lot of Realms with a sliding scale of detail and focus. Most might have only had one sourcebook to their name, and you can get by on that and the campaign setting entry. I find these are the best choices for realms to focus on, they strike a good balance between having plenty of information to work with and not enough to overwhelm, and usually only require one sourcebook to get to know well. At the other end of the scale, there are lands that have only ever had the scantest bit of attention: Lantan, Sossal, all the lands between Chult and the Shaar, Murghom and Semphar, and others. Conversely, these usually require a lot more research to glean enough facts to go on. Then there's the realms specifically set aside in past editions for DMs and players to mess with as they like, never to be fiddled with by designers and authors. Erlkazar, Border Kingdoms, Sembia - you can see the concept didn't last long. And there's entire continents that were never touched: Anchorome, Osse, various nameless lands. I'm speaking of the classic Realms, of course. For post-Spellplague, you're looking at nothing everywhere. :P You're going to have to be more specific, as your basically asking us to rank the entire setting from highest to lowest. What's the era, the character concept, what does the player want?
#5 lord_karsus Dec 29, 2008 10:27:44	-Waterdeep, I think, tops the list in terms of information out there about it. Cormyr has a lot, too, but Cormyr is an entire nation, whereas Waterdeep is a single City-State.
#6 thephilosopherking Dec 29, 2008 11:56:15	I'm surprised by the lack of lore about Chondath and the Ride/Tortured Lands
#7 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Dec 30, 2008 14:32:17	Chondath doesn't have much information about it, true, but it was the setting of the Scions of Arrabar trilogy.
#8 thephilosopherking Dec 31, 2008 6:26:02	does it contain details on their society, the novels I read are very poor in realmslore
#9 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Dec 31, 2008 11:53:57	does it contain details on their society... Yes.