| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
215 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Sep 2025 : 17:34:39
|
I have never run a long term FR campaign, only random one shots and shorter campaigns without regard to time period. My group haven't looked at the Realms in many years, but it has recently come up that we might want to set our game here for the foreseeable future (assuming we continue to enjoy it).
I own most of the major products from the 1e through 3e periods. Our group plays 3.5, but rules aren't relevant.
I was thinking it would be nice to use the beautiful 3e library of Realms sourcebooks as the core of this game, but I also want to be able to pull from 1e and 2e for adventure ideas, maps, adventure modules and so forth. Part of the attraction of running this world to me is the endless lore to pull from, but so much of it can be contradictory of course.
I was looking at Eric Boyds Under Illefarn Anew as a potential good starting place for a campaign. A classic module redone and expanded. However, while reading through it I started thinking about all that I would need to consider between the assumed time period of this module and the 1372 time period of the 3e supplements.
I know the common answer is "take what you want and leave the rest". But in a scenario in which I want to pick a period between 1e and 3e to base the bulk of the game off of while still being able to use material from other editions (especially for adventures), what do you see as the path of least resitance? If there is one.
- 1e as the base and incorporating future lore as desired?
- 2e as the base and working backwards and forwards? From what I can tell 2e transitioned pretty smoothly into 3e, no?
- Use 3e as the base and use older stuff where it won't conflate too much.
4e and 5e are out for the most part. I don't own any of it and don't buy new gaming stuff, though I'll use stuff from free online sources if it fits what I am doing.
A tricky and very subjective question I know. I suppose subjective answers are what I am looking for.
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1431 Posts |
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
215 Posts |
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1431 Posts |
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4245 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 00:12:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ozreth
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
1356 Dale Reckoning, if you dislike The Time of Troubles (or the mere thought of so widespread an event).
1367 Dale Reckoning, if you do not mind or if you enjoy The Time of Troubles.
Starting with 3e, the map of Faerun shrinks and its population explodes. Of course, only add that which you find appealing/logical.
What major issues, if any, would one run into using the 2e map with 3e books?
I think you could use either the 1e or 2e map and use 3.x rules all you wanted. The mechanics and/or map you use really don't pose any clashes. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
 |
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
215 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 00:14:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
quote:
Originally posted by Ozreth
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
1356 Dale Reckoning, if you dislike The Time of Troubles (or the mere thought of so widespread an event).
1367 Dale Reckoning, if you do not mind or if you enjoy The Time of Troubles.
Starting with 3e, the map of Faerun shrinks and its population explodes. Of course, only add that which you find appealing/logical.
What major issues, if any, would one run into using the 2e map with 3e books?
I think you could use either the 1e or 2e map and use 3.x rules all you wanted. The mechanics and/or map you use really don't pose any clashes.
For sure. I mean if you were using 3.5 sourcebooks with the 2e map will you run into issues when it comes to distances mentioned in the 3e books, how long it should take to get from a to b, so on and so forth.
I rather like the idea of lots of open space to make my own, but am unsure how that clashes with the way the world is presented in the 3e books. |
Edited by - Ozreth on 19 Sep 2025 00:15:08 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4245 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 00:23:54
|
Maps are guestimations made by map makers. I don't view them like we view maps today. There are no "sure" measurements for such instruments in a quasi-medieval setting...even with magic a wizard or whatever might have made a map with magic that is close to what the scale should be...but most maps surely are more in the line of maps for estimated directions.
"Follow this road until you come to the bridge in the village of Barrof; then take the east road to the right after the bridge. Entire trip may run you a couple of days...depending on your dwarf friend here and how fast his little legs will carry him..." |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1431 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 00:40:32
|
| It is easier to subtract that it is to add; if a particular instance of those generous pre-3e distances becomes a hindrance, introduce interposing impassable and/or hostile terrain. |
Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Earth names in the Realms are more common than you may think. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8016 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 03:16:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ozreth
What major issues, if any, would one run into using the 2e map with 3e books?
FR has evolved alongside D&D so in effect each edition of the game is married to an edition of the setting. And each transition to a new edition involves some sort of change(s) to the setting as explanation for why the gods, the races, the classes, the things are suddenly different than they were before.
The transition from 1E to 2E was basically a rules cleanup/reorganization which inflicted minimal lasting change to the Realms. (Unless you count the entire notion of old-Mystra-dies-and-there-are-cataclysmic-magical-storms-until-new-Mystra-rises which this first transition invented and subsequent iterations unimaginatively repeated).
There were some early-2E to late-2E teething conflicts when new segments of the Realms were added. Kara-Tur and Hordelands, Zakhara, Maztica, Chult, etc. Seems like every time the peoples of the Realms went exploring beyond the edge of the map they would bump into other people and have a somewhat major war which would last just long enough to make an expansion set and a novel trilogy.
The transition from late-2E to early-3E was more sort of a "setting-was-always-like-this" handwave which didn't have any specific associated cataclysm. Indeed, Cyric messed things up more during the middle of 2E than the Time of Troubles and Avatar Crisis messed things up during the transition to 2E.
But the transitions from early-3E to late-3E to early-3.5E to late-3.5E each introduced some sort of major thing which changed details on the map of the Realms. (The 3.x game and setting gradually took on darker themes and tones as the focus turned to a sort of drow invasion of the surface (through countless exiled Drizzt copycats and variations), then to a Daemonfey invasion, then to a Phaerimm invasion, then a Shadovar invasion, then to Szass Tam's undead madness (and invasion), then to another Mystra dying and getting reborn/replaced (again), then to revitalized powers (and narratives) for Mask and Bane and Shar, etc. And towards the end of 3E there were even warforged, goliaths, tieflings, and dragonborn modelled very much like the versions which 4E later "introduced" to the setting.)
(On paper, the most fundamental and important change to the Realms in all of 3E was the new planar cosmology which abandoned the old Great Wheel cosmology, reshaped the pantheon, and dramatically changed the relationships priests/paladins/etc had with their deities. In practice, this didn't really have any impact on the Realms at all and was more of an annoyance for throwbacks to 2E-era Spelljammer/Planescape lore.) |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 19 Sep 2025 03:49:32 |
|
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
215 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 04:24:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
(On paper, the most fundamental and important change to the Realms in all of 3E was the new planar cosmology which abandoned the old Great Wheel cosmology, reshaped the pantheon, and dramatically changed the relationships priests/paladins/etc had with their deities. In practice, this didn't really have any impact on the Realms at all and was more of an annoyance for throwbacks to 2E-era Spelljammer/Planescape lore.)
Is there a consensus to how people feel about this change in retrospect? |
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1431 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 05:50:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ozreth
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
(On paper, the most fundamental and important change to the Realms in all of 3E was the new planar cosmology which abandoned the old Great Wheel cosmology, reshaped the pantheon, and dramatically changed the relationships priests/paladins/etc had with their deities. In practice, this didn't really have any impact on the Realms at all and was more of an annoyance for throwbacks to 2E-era Spelljammer/Planescape lore.)
Is there a consensus to how people feel about this change in retrospect?
I am unsure about any consensus, but the benefits seem clear. The Great Wheel model features much (high quality) content ready to utilize (it is easy to employ Planescape material while filtering out elements which do not mesh with your vision); furthermore, it is trivial to link one world with other realities should the need arise...the sense of connectivity/continuity is stronger. The 3e+ World Tree model lends The Realms' cosmology a somewhat unique feeling; also, there is no risk of being overwhelmed by supplementary material. Personally, to me, The Great Wheel holds greater appeal due to its simplicity, its universality and its related products. |
Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Earth names in the Realms are more common than you may think. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
When is the most "practical" period to set a game?
