23:26 - You're EXACTLY right. I'm currently running a campaign for my group, in which I'm using the "Scourge of the Slave Lords" (A1-A4's omibus), and having the adventure set around the Pirate Isles in the Sea of Fallen Stars.
This video brought back wonderful memories. Thank you SO very much. I started running my campaigns in the Forgotten Realms setting immediately after 2nd Edition D&D was released, and I never looked back. The setting is so vast, that it's remarkably easy to just insert generic regions and adventures into the setting. I for one LOVED Dungeon Magazine, and would often insert adventures from that publication into the Forgotten Realms. 🤗
I've loved the realms for along time, having devoured R.A. Salvatore and Elaine Cunningham novels. Glad to see you give it your touch. Your videos are gems, and I hope more people find them.
I think an important part of early Realms is that the initial presentation (i.e., gray box) both covered a wide swathe of land, _and_ was very localized. By having the _Cyclopedia_ be supposedly compiled by Elminster, TSR could provide as much detail as the box could support in the heartlands of Greenwood's campaigns (most notably Cormyr and the Dales, but also going west), while being very general about things further away. Minor notes: I3-5 and H3 also had Forgotten Realms logos; they were just confined to the back covers. The start of H1 has a mention of "The Greatest Show on Oerth", implying World of Greyhawk, but of course, there's no good place for Vaasa and Damara there. And only H1 (and... H3) was really supporting BattleSystem; overall the H-series tried to pump the latest big TSR product (_DSG_ in H2 and _Manual of the Planes_ in H4).
Similarly with Greyhawk and Pluffet Smedger, but not, as you say with the Realms set, detailing a core region - although TSR did later follow that mould with From the Ashes. They were definitely ones for templates! You're right about the rear cover logos. It's been a chunk of time since I ever looked at the back of those books - I'd completely forgotten! Appropriate, in a way 😏 The H series is all over the place, for the exact reason you outline. It's fun, but highly disjointed.
Excellent summary as always Willy, really enjoying these overview type pieces. I played in FR for many years and didnt realise where the forgotton refrence came from so thank you for that. I'm running a long term GH campaign atm, but this make me hanker for those forgotton days :D
Excellent vid! Nitpick- 1:43 "The western portion of Faerûn. From the border of the Hordelands, to the Sea of Swords." That description & the map on the screen (from TM4) is the entirety of Faerûn, not the western portion of it.
Technically true - however, it's useful to define it. Karen Wynn Fonstad's map I used - and, indeed, TM4 - include that grey transitional region leading into The Hordelands. Anyway - yours is a fair enough clarification!
good stuff, played a fairly long running campaign on the sea of falling stars and a few smaller ones on the sword coast when it first came out, always liked the realms
Great video as usual! I like your histories in particular. As you touch upon, I think the FR hatred comes from the TSR power struggle back in the mid 80s. Gygax lost, and the most conspicuous result was the publication of Forgotten Realms. Thus the company civil war spilled into the community with younger players embracing the new world while the old school (consisting mainly of Greyhawkers and those who created their own worlds) resented having the Realms shoved down their throats. It's nowhere near the intensity it once was but, decades later, that resentment still smolders.
It's an odd way to exist, I find. Regardless of the logo on an RPG book, it's still raidable. And arguably, Greyhawk got more supporting material during 2nd Ed. than it did in 1st. Sometimes, I'm sure some folk exist in a permanent bubble of anger and indignation. Odd time to live through, but no need to take it out on the worlds! Plus, to be honest, with the sheer amount of Greenwood material in Dragon, I think it was inevitable that we'd see some semblance of his Realms sooner or later.
Yes. There was some good Greyhawk stuff released for 2nd Edition. Your video on Carl Sargent's work showcases some of the highlights. For lowlights, on the other hand, your video of the 10 worst D&D adventures places not one, not two, but three 2nd Edition Greyhawk modules in the #1 slot of shame, declaring that they appeared to be designed to "kill Greyhawk". It was a strange time of feast or famine for Oerth.
@@kathykoenig6512 There was a fair bit of dross in those strange days. Some of it was, I feel, to keep up product volume without paying enough attention to quality. Child's Play could have been plonked in with any world, but had the Greyhawk banner on it - so yes, for a short period, there may have been an attempt to kill Greyhawk. It didn't last too long, though!
I mostly grew up with D&D exclusively in videogames, so I used to think forgotten realms were D&D. Honestly, I figured D&D and the sword coast were pretty much the same deal.
I can see how that would happen. I'm old enough to predated video game D&D, but it is saying something when you compare how underutilised other D&D settings have been on the computer screen. Most have had their moments, the Realms has had the lion's share.
I never played a proper FR campaign, but I didn't mind some of the novels, pcgames and I liked taking ideas from the setting to enhance my own. I also have met my fellow Canadian, Ed Greenwood, he's a great guy and a fun conversationalist!
Ed's TH-cam channel is very good as well. He live streamed a few game in the Haunted Halls of Eveningstar not too long ago. He was s great DM, to no surprise.
I personally took the timeline back to the 1E classic boxset. I ignore the novels but like the informational materials on religion, culture, etc. The novels are good, for the most part, but it gets very top heavy very quickly if one tries to incorporate them into gameplay.
That's more or less my take on it. The novels mostly make for an interesting parallel timeline, where they are considered at all, when I hit the Realms.
Forget keeping up with the canon. Freeze your history at a chosen point, and play in that period. Stop letting the blue-haired sensitivity readers tell you the history of the Realms, and play it as it was meant to be played.
Not sure about blue-haired hacks or there being one way it was meant to be played - but as for freezing history and going from a point that suits you - absolutely!
The video and this comment touch on a very important point, something that WotC continues to do, taking something people liked and making it into something they don't. The Realms, Dragonlance, both settings experienced way too much turning the world upside down for me to want to continue with them. I loved the 1st and 2nd eds of both, and it's fine to have ONE cataclysm to add drama to your setting, but one after another becomes boring. I'm not relearning the same setting again and again. When I play them, it's the original editions.
@@stephenclements6158 - As much as I could never stand the Eberron setting, I have to admit it did one thing extremely well: Every adventure/campaign was always set exactly 2 years after the last war. Everyone could learn the setting, study the history, and write their character accordingly, without concerns about the next big expansion. Again, too bad it sucked, though.
@@stephenclements6158 Sort of agree. Not so much about the WotC commentary (TSR was just as complicit, if anything) - but certainly, a setting that goes from cataclysm to cataclysm just feels like it's entering the worst shark-jumping territory, the worst soap opera sensationalist storyline.
@@WillyMuffinUK For me, it is exactly like a junk drawer... overloaded and stuffed with things that have no relationship with anything around them except for the fact that you just tossed them in because you had nowhere else. No linguistic affinities, and names that were pulled out of a bingo hopper. It's not alive and everything feels and looks like a poorly constructed jigsaw puzzle.
@@dvosburg1966 Sort of fairish, to an extent. I'd be interested in what you think of Mystara, which is - in my opinion - a worse contender on all of your points than the Realms is.
You might not like the Realms and that's totally fine, not everyone is going to dig a sandbox. I just can't comprehend how you would say it's soulless when you look at the work people like Ed Greenwood & R.A. Salvatore put in, especially pre 4e Forgotten Realms. Iunno if it's because I grew up with the Forgotten Realms and have a certain fondness for it that I'm willing to forgive some weirdness but for all it's faults one thing you can't say is that it lacked any soul.
"Soulless" as in by the time of its release, artists and content creators no longer ran things at TSR. The suits who had never rolled a d20 in their lives were now in charge. It's a sad story. While you could see the love and devotion guys like Greenwood and Salvatore had for the Realms, you could also smell the calculated business decision of every Realms product released. It wasn't fair to Greenwood and his creation, but that's how the chips fell.
A wizard is neither late nor early, he arrives precisely when he means to. Just in time for my first 3.5 campaign
Heh - always a great quote.
23:26 - You're EXACTLY right. I'm currently running a campaign for my group, in which I'm using the "Scourge of the Slave Lords" (A1-A4's omibus), and having the adventure set around the Pirate Isles in the Sea of Fallen Stars.
That sounds like a good fit 👌
This video brought back wonderful memories. Thank you SO very much.
I started running my campaigns in the Forgotten Realms setting immediately after 2nd Edition D&D was released, and I never looked back. The setting is so vast, that it's remarkably easy to just insert generic regions and adventures into the setting. I for one LOVED Dungeon Magazine, and would often insert adventures from that publication into the Forgotten Realms. 🤗
Thank-you - I'm glad you enjoyed it! And that you're still having fun around the Realms 🙂
I've loved the realms for along time, having devoured R.A. Salvatore and Elaine Cunningham novels. Glad to see you give it your touch. Your videos are gems, and I hope more people find them.
Thank-you 🙂
I think an important part of early Realms is that the initial presentation (i.e., gray box) both covered a wide swathe of land, _and_ was very localized. By having the _Cyclopedia_ be supposedly compiled by Elminster, TSR could provide as much detail as the box could support in the heartlands of Greenwood's campaigns (most notably Cormyr and the Dales, but also going west), while being very general about things further away.
Minor notes: I3-5 and H3 also had Forgotten Realms logos; they were just confined to the back covers. The start of H1 has a mention of "The Greatest Show on Oerth", implying World of Greyhawk, but of course, there's no good place for Vaasa and Damara there. And only H1 (and... H3) was really supporting BattleSystem; overall the H-series tried to pump the latest big TSR product (_DSG_ in H2 and _Manual of the Planes_ in H4).
Similarly with Greyhawk and Pluffet Smedger, but not, as you say with the Realms set, detailing a core region - although TSR did later follow that mould with From the Ashes. They were definitely ones for templates!
You're right about the rear cover logos. It's been a chunk of time since I ever looked at the back of those books - I'd completely forgotten! Appropriate, in a way 😏
The H series is all over the place, for the exact reason you outline. It's fun, but highly disjointed.
Excellent summary as always Willy, really enjoying these overview type pieces. I played in FR for many years and didnt realise where the forgotton refrence came from so thank you for that. I'm running a long term GH campaign atm, but this make me hanker for those forgotton days :D
Thank-you 🙂 I'm glad you enjoyed it (and you could always run an FR/GH crossover 😉)
Excellent vid! Nitpick-
1:43 "The western portion of Faerûn. From the border of the Hordelands, to the Sea of Swords."
That description & the map on the screen (from TM4) is the entirety of Faerûn, not the western portion of it.
Technically true - however, it's useful to define it. Karen Wynn Fonstad's map I used - and, indeed, TM4 - include that grey transitional region leading into The Hordelands. Anyway - yours is a fair enough clarification!
Thank yea kindly!
Welcome!
great job thank you for such a great video
Thank-you!
good stuff, played a fairly long running campaign on the sea of falling stars and a few smaller ones on the sword coast when it first came out, always liked the realms
Mostly Moonsea for me, when I've visited the world. And a thoroughly fun jaunt to the east - but that will have to wait until another Realms video!
Great video as usual! I like your histories in particular.
As you touch upon, I think the FR hatred comes from the TSR power struggle back in the mid 80s. Gygax lost, and the most conspicuous result was the publication of Forgotten Realms. Thus the company civil war spilled into the community with younger players embracing the new world while the old school (consisting mainly of Greyhawkers and those who created their own worlds) resented having the Realms shoved down their throats.
It's nowhere near the intensity it once was but, decades later, that resentment still smolders.
It's an odd way to exist, I find. Regardless of the logo on an RPG book, it's still raidable. And arguably, Greyhawk got more supporting material during 2nd Ed. than it did in 1st. Sometimes, I'm sure some folk exist in a permanent bubble of anger and indignation. Odd time to live through, but no need to take it out on the worlds!
Plus, to be honest, with the sheer amount of Greenwood material in Dragon, I think it was inevitable that we'd see some semblance of his Realms sooner or later.
Yes. There was some good Greyhawk stuff released for 2nd Edition. Your video on Carl Sargent's work showcases some of the highlights.
For lowlights, on the other hand, your video of the 10 worst D&D adventures places not one, not two, but three 2nd Edition Greyhawk modules in the #1 slot of shame, declaring that they appeared to be designed to "kill Greyhawk".
It was a strange time of feast or famine for Oerth.
@@kathykoenig6512 There was a fair bit of dross in those strange days. Some of it was, I feel, to keep up product volume without paying enough attention to quality. Child's Play could have been plonked in with any world, but had the Greyhawk banner on it - so yes, for a short period, there may have been an attempt to kill Greyhawk. It didn't last too long, though!
I mostly grew up with D&D exclusively in videogames, so I used to think forgotten realms were D&D. Honestly, I figured D&D and the sword coast were pretty much the same deal.
I can see how that would happen. I'm old enough to predated video game D&D, but it is saying something when you compare how underutilised other D&D settings have been on the computer screen. Most have had their moments, the Realms has had the lion's share.
I never played a proper FR campaign, but I didn't mind some of the novels, pcgames and I liked taking ideas from the setting to enhance my own.
I also have met my fellow Canadian, Ed Greenwood, he's a great guy and a fun conversationalist!
It's very raidable. I've had the odd conversation or three with Ed, too - mostly during the Interactive Atlas project. Thoroughly pleasant individual.
Ed's TH-cam channel is very good as well. He live streamed a few game in the Haunted Halls of Eveningstar not too long ago. He was s great DM, to no surprise.
@@anon_laughing_man You can clearly see the enthusiasm he still has for his world in his presentations on his channel!
I personally took the timeline back to the 1E classic boxset. I ignore the novels but like the informational materials on religion, culture, etc. The novels are good, for the most part, but it gets very top heavy very quickly if one tries to incorporate them into gameplay.
That's more or less my take on it. The novels mostly make for an interesting parallel timeline, where they are considered at all, when I hit the Realms.
Exactly.
Forget keeping up with the canon. Freeze your history at a chosen point, and play in that period. Stop letting the blue-haired sensitivity readers tell you the history of the Realms, and play it as it was meant to be played.
Not sure about blue-haired hacks or there being one way it was meant to be played - but as for freezing history and going from a point that suits you - absolutely!
The video and this comment touch on a very important point, something that WotC continues to do, taking something people liked and making it into something they don't. The Realms, Dragonlance, both settings experienced way too much turning the world upside down for me to want to continue with them.
I loved the 1st and 2nd eds of both, and it's fine to have ONE cataclysm to add drama to your setting, but one after another becomes boring. I'm not relearning the same setting again and again.
When I play them, it's the original editions.
@@stephenclements6158 - As much as I could never stand the Eberron setting, I have to admit it did one thing extremely well: Every adventure/campaign was always set exactly 2 years after the last war. Everyone could learn the setting, study the history, and write their character accordingly, without concerns about the next big expansion.
Again, too bad it sucked, though.
@@stephenclements6158 Sort of agree. Not so much about the WotC commentary (TSR was just as complicit, if anything) - but certainly, a setting that goes from cataclysm to cataclysm just feels like it's entering the worst shark-jumping territory, the worst soap opera sensationalist storyline.
The world with no soul. For all of its limitations I would rather ride across The Land with Kevin Landwaster.
Interesting - no soul? Can you elaborate, because I find it has as much soul as most D&D published settings.
@@WillyMuffinUK For me, it is exactly like a junk drawer... overloaded and stuffed with things that have no relationship with anything around them except for the fact that you just tossed them in because you had nowhere else. No linguistic affinities, and names that were pulled out of a bingo hopper.
It's not alive and everything feels and looks like a poorly constructed jigsaw puzzle.
@@dvosburg1966 Sort of fairish, to an extent. I'd be interested in what you think of Mystara, which is - in my opinion - a worse contender on all of your points than the Realms is.
You might not like the Realms and that's totally fine, not everyone is going to dig a sandbox. I just can't comprehend how you would say it's soulless when you look at the work people like Ed Greenwood & R.A. Salvatore put in, especially pre 4e Forgotten Realms. Iunno if it's because I grew up with the Forgotten Realms and have a certain fondness for it that I'm willing to forgive some weirdness but for all it's faults one thing you can't say is that it lacked any soul.
"Soulless" as in by the time of its release, artists and content creators no longer ran things at TSR. The suits who had never rolled a d20 in their lives were now in charge. It's a sad story. While you could see the love and devotion guys like Greenwood and Salvatore had for the Realms, you could also smell the calculated business decision of every Realms product released.
It wasn't fair to Greenwood and his creation, but that's how the chips fell.