| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
227 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
1463 Posts |
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
227 Posts |
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1463 Posts |
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4253 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
227 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
4253 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
1463 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 00:40:32
|
| It is easier to subtract than 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. |
Edited by - Azar on 22 Sep 2025 02:10:37 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8024 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
227 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
1463 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. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2509 Posts |
Posted - 19 Sep 2025 : 16:24:51
|
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.
3E had "the new planar cosmology"? I thought it was all "maybe this, or maybe that, or something" non-committal drooling. Just like with Darkvision... and everything else.
I know a bunch of gimmicks were randomly dropped in. Many of which were not bad (if rarely good). Like those Planar Touchstones. But this isn't really incompatible with Planescape, much less could amount to a "new planar cosmology".
Except that "Far Realms" thing Bruce Cordell unfortunately experimented with once, and then some tentacle fetishist pushed way too hard during the entire 3.x era. But it can be simply ignored, exactly because it's not meaningfully related to anything. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8024 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 02:41:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
3E had "the new planar cosmology"? I thought it was all "maybe this, or maybe that, or something" non-committal drooling ...
The "Great Tree" or "World Tree" (or "Great Mountain") thing was new and it was authoritatively presented as the current/new/always/only model for all the planes of existence beyond the Realms.
The "Astral Sea" idea in the late-end 3E (and 4E) stuff did the same thing.
As I mentioned above, it didn't have any real impact on the Realms. I think because most FR players stayed focussed on FR settings, they didn't (and don't) much care about other worlds and parts of the larger universe floating around out there - at least not until/unless these things directly intersected with the game or story they were trying to finish.
It did cause controvery with the subset of players who prefer Planescape, Spelljammer, the old Manual of the Planes, the old planar cosmology. This stuff was creative and comprehensive, rich in lore, and it fit the monsters/powers/etc of the D&D universe quite well since (in earlier editions) it was developed in parallel with it. But 3E utterly ignored the Great Wheel, the early products didn't even bother to mention it, the later products dismissively referred to it in passing as an antiquated and incorrect old understanding of the universe.
Some 3E-era (d20/SRD) products reconciled this problem by asserting that "planes" are really just "other places" elsewhere in the cosmos, that "cosmologies" are really just "metaphors" for understanding/explaining the structure of the cosmos, that they all "exist" but that it is very difficult to access those which are outside the parameters of the "cosmology" you prefer. (But, again, this was not a problem and did not require a solution if your interests remained entirely within the FR setting.) |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 20 Sep 2025 02:45:02 |
|
|
|
Scots Dragon
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
114 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 13:50:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
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?
There will be WOTC references and changes (e.g., "The Silver Marches") which do not appear on the TSR map.
The Silver Marches are just what the 2e era calls the Moonlands and the 'Alliance of Silvermoon' is already an established thing circa 1369 DR in the North boxed set. |
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1463 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 19:13:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Scots Dragon
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
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?
There will be WOTC references and changes (e.g., "The Silver Marches") which do not appear on the TSR map.
The Silver Marches are just what the 2e era calls the Moonlands and the 'Alliance of Silvermoon' is already an established thing circa 1369 DR in the North boxed set.
I was comparing the base 3e map (2001) to the base 2e map (1993); the former has "The Silver Marches" across part of Faerun's northwestern region while the latter has yet to integrate that label. For that matter, the map included in The North: Guide to The Savage Frontier (1996) also lacks "The Silver Marches". There are differences between the editions. |
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. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2509 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 20:44:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
The "Great Tree" or "World Tree" (or "Great Mountain") thing was new and it was authoritatively presented as the current/new/always/only model for all the planes of existence beyond the Realms.
The "Astral Sea" idea in the late-end 3E (and 4E) stuff did the same thing.
That "alternate cosmology" is exactly this sort of non-committal "maybe this maybe that". As long as it's not obligatory, it does not necessarily change how anything works in Planescape. And as long as does not actually change anything, it can be considered simply "cosmology as known by specific groups of the Clueless, such as those following certain pantheons".
Planescape already had both Yggdrasil and Olympus as known ways of planar travel, so no big deal.
quote:
Some 3E-era (d20/SRD) products reconciled this problem by asserting that "planes" are really just "other places" elsewhere in the cosmos, that "cosmologies" are really just "metaphors" for understanding/explaining the structure of the cosmos, that they all "exist" but that it is very difficult to access those which are outside the parameters of the "cosmology" you prefer.
Which is indeed "maybe this maybe that", most of which ends up not definite enough to actually contradict anything. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1463 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 20:48:24
|
| The simplest (real-world) answer: Wizards of the Coast did not want to put in the work necessary to update 2e planar material and, so, they started from scratch. Continuity only matters if it is profitable. |
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. |
|
|
|
Scots Dragon
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
114 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 20:54:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
The "Great Tree" or "World Tree" (or "Great Mountain") thing was new and it was authoritatively presented as the current/new/always/only model for all the planes of existence beyond the Realms.
The "Astral Sea" idea in the late-end 3E (and 4E) stuff did the same thing.
That "alternate cosmology" is exactly this sort of non-committal "maybe this maybe that". As long as it's not obligatory, it does not necessarily change how anything works in Planescape. And as long as does not actually change anything, it can be considered simply "cosmology as known by specific groups of the Clueless, such as those following certain pantheons".
Planescape already had both Yggdrasil and Olympus as known ways of planar travel, so no big deal.
quote:
Some 3E-era (d20/SRD) products reconciled this problem by asserting that "planes" are really just "other places" elsewhere in the cosmos, that "cosmologies" are really just "metaphors" for understanding/explaining the structure of the cosmos, that they all "exist" but that it is very difficult to access those which are outside the parameters of the "cosmology" you prefer.
Which is indeed "maybe this maybe that", most of which ends up not definite enough to actually contradict anything.
You could have some fun with it by having various rival wizards and sages on planar lore cleaving super strongly to their own personal interpretation of the cosmological structure. Vicious back and forth letter arguments between a Candlekeep monk and a Watchful Order conjurer about which cosmological model is correct. Bonus points for one using the World Tree and the other using the World Axis so they're actually both wrong. |
|
|
|
Scots Dragon
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
114 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 20:57:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
I was comparing the base 3e map (2001) to the base 2e map (1993); the former has "The Silver Marches" across part of Faerun's northwestern region while the latter has yet to integrate that label. For that matter, the map included in The North: Guide to The Savage Frontier (1996) also lacks "The Silver Marches". There are differences between the editions.
I feel like 'they have a new name for the region around Silverymoon' is something of a non-problem. |
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1463 Posts |
Posted - 20 Sep 2025 : 21:16:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Scots Dragon
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
I was comparing the base 3e map (2001) to the base 2e map (1993); the former has "The Silver Marches" across part of Faerun's northwestern region while the latter has yet to integrate that label. For that matter, the map included in The North: Guide to The Savage Frontier (1996) also lacks "The Silver Marches". There are differences between the editions.
I feel like 'they have a new name for the region around Silverymoon' is something of a non-problem.
The name arose from a setting development that did not occur until later in the era (and only made officially part of the landscape with the debut of 3e). You can argue technicalities if you wish, but it still exists and the second edition of The Forgotten Realms stretches across nearly eleven years of gaming history; "early" and "late" 2e are each distinct from the other. |
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. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2509 Posts |
Posted - 22 Sep 2025 : 00:23:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Scots Dragon
You could have some fun with it by having various rival wizards and sages on planar lore cleaving super strongly to their own personal interpretation of the cosmological structure. Vicious back and forth letter arguments between a Candlekeep monk and a Watchful Order conjurer about which cosmological model is correct. Bonus points for one using the World Tree and the other using the World Axis so they're actually both wrong.
This sort of thing was suggested. The stereotype of Clueless Prime is a bumpkin who thinks that his world is the center of Multiverse, that everyone knows (and cares about) his deity and that cows are evil because they have horns. With the caveat that to be met outside their own stomping grounds at all, Primes had to walk the planes some way or another, and survive despite being poorly adapted.
Spelljammer design of isolated spheres with their own features encourages this, too.
Toril generally seems to be less backward than average Prime, if anything. But then there’s Krynn... |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
When is the most "practical" period to set a game?
