# Should Forgotten Realms remain the default setting?



## Haplo781 (Sep 23, 2022)

Forgotten Realms will have been the default setting for a full decade when 1DD releases. Sould WotC stick with it or give a different setting a turn?


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 23, 2022)

I say go with Dark Sun. Or maybe classic Dragonlance.


----------



## Weird Dave (Sep 23, 2022)

I'd like to stick with it - but move focus AWAY from the Sword Coast. Give me content set in Cormyr, Sembia, the Dalelands, and the Dragon Coast with rich art and fantastic maps. Cormyr's already a great starting place for adventurers with their royal recognition of adventuring charters and everything. What Azoun are we up to in the Forest Kingdom? What new threats have emerged?

Yes, I know I could develop this content on my own on the DMsGuild, but it's nice to have WotC throw their considerable weight behind really fleshing out an area and adventure with all the resources they can bring to bear.


----------



## Minigiant (Sep 23, 2022)

They should create *a new setting from scratch* that has all the default assumptions in it rather than twist another setting into the new base assumptions.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 23, 2022)

I would prefer that there was no default setting at this point. Modules can stand on their own without needing to be attached to a previous setting. If they do insist on a previous setting then FR seems like the best option, Greyhawk fizzled out pretty quick when they tried using it for 3E. Adding a book to the 3 cores thats a deep dive on world building and adventure design would be better imo. There's already so many campaign settings out there I don't think we need a new one.


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 23, 2022)

Third Edition D&D did a good job at keeping the PHB, the DMG and MM world neutral while producing campaign setting books separately. As each campaign setting book could then focus on things such as signature player character races (like Eberron's Kalashtar and Warforged), setting specific magic items, setting specific spells, etc. 

What exactly does a default setting do for D&D?


----------



## Lojaan (Sep 23, 2022)

Yep but time to flesh out a different area


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 23, 2022)

Lojaan said:


> Yep but time to flesh out a different area



If they do stick with the Realms do an area that has never or has had very little detailing; Nimbral comes to mind. Or my second choice would be the Dales, Cormanthor, Moonsea and Cormyr area.  Screw adventures, give us a real campaign setting book, and I don't even want a short starter adventure in it.


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 23, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> They should create *a new setting from scratch* that has all the default assumptions in it rather than twist another setting into the new base assumptions.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 23, 2022)

Corinnguard said:


> What exactly does a default setting do for D&D?



I think it limits the game. As far as I remember Greyhawk was where alot of the classic 1E AD&D adventures were set but there were others that were standalone and not set in any particular setting. Most people picked up a 32 pg module, ran it for a few sessions and moved on to the next and just strung them together with little regard to world at large. I'd like to see a return to that type of game to some extent.


----------



## payn (Sep 23, 2022)

Birthright.


----------



## Minigiant (Sep 23, 2022)

@Haplo781 
Pretty much.

3e was molded into the best assumptions of FR.

Nentir Vale runs on the base assumptions of 4e play.

So 5.5e default setting would have to be new as no past setting uses the base assumptions of 5e.


----------



## Andvari (Sep 23, 2022)

Besides name recognition, Forgotten Realms has everything you'd expect from a standard fantasy setting. I think Dark Sun is cool, but it's a risky pick as a default setting. 3E was fairly subtle about Greyhawk being the default setting. I think the only real hint to it in the PHB were the listed deities. That works with FR as well.


----------



## Shiroiken (Sep 23, 2022)

Especially considering how much they're trying to detach lore from the base game, I think homebrew should become the default once again.


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 23, 2022)

This should belong on a different thread, but, if the Forgotten Realms is not going to be default setting for 5.5e/1D&D and a new setting is created in it's place, what would you like to see in the new setting?


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 24, 2022)

Corinnguard said:


> This should belong on a different thread, but, if the Forgotten Realms is not going to be default setting for 5.5e/1D&D and a new setting is created in it's place, what would you like to see in the new setting?



Mystara. Especially since WorC is trying to woo Japan (which loves Basic D&D but hasn't gotten on board with anything since.)

Edit: misread your post.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Sep 24, 2022)

I'm pretty sure 50th Anniversary D&D will use "the Multiverse" as its "official setting".

FR will just remain the prime example setting.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 24, 2022)

Shiroiken said:


> Especially considering how much they're trying to detach lore from the base game, I think homebrew should become the default once again.



Me too. I'm not much of a homebrew guy in the sense that I dont create my own worlds much. Not to say that I havent but they were few and far between and short lived. Although I almost never run pre-made adventures anymore and write my own almost exclusively. Theres plenty of how-to books from previous editions I can use such as the Dungeon Builders Guidebook, the World Builders Guidebook, and Stronghold Builders Guidebook but I'd like to see these updated and expanded for the next edition. I'm running a 5E Midnight campaign now and its pretty light on particulars so something to help flesh things out would help. In the end I can always just make this stuff up and do as I need. I have said this in other threads that my opinion is that WotC should rethink the core rulebook format, in addition to the PHB, DMG & MM maybe they should add a campaign design book and/or the default campaign setting book for this new edition.


----------



## Benjamin Olson (Sep 24, 2022)

I like having a default setting when the lore is distant and unobtrusive, like the way Forgotten Realms is used in Lost Mines of Phandelver or a Tales from the Yawning Portal entry; something I don't have to grapple with to run the module, but a vast pool of inspiration when a player wants more background on something, or the party decides to visit a place on the map I haven't prepared. And I think the disposable genericness and extensively developed lore of the Forgotten Realms and the Sword Coast in particular make it perfect for this.

But I don't like the use of the setting in the big 5e campaign books which are often pretty hyper-plugged in to Forgotten Realms lore, feeling the need to namecheck this, that, and the other thing that probably matters to someone who read some novel but that isn't important to anyone I play with. You basically have to continually check the Forgotten Realms Wiki to fully wrap your head around what they are presenting, and frankly in the campaign books I've read I'm not convinced the entire writing staff working on the campaign could keep the lore, and whatever changes the book was making to it, straight.

So my answer is yes, I want to keep the Forgotten Realms as the default setting. It gives people exactly what they expect out of D&D, accommodates all player options, and has an endless bounty of lore that I can take or leave for my version of a campaign. But I think, as it is used in 5e-era full official campaign books, it has been a detriment rather than a boon.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 24, 2022)

Benjamin Olson said:


> You basically have to continually check the Forgotten Realms Wiki to fully wrap your head around what they are presenting, and frankly in the campaign books I've read I'm not convinced the entire writing staff working on the campaign could keep the lore, and whatever changes the book was making to it, straight.



I don't remember when the Forgotten Reams Atlas CD came out, but I think it was 1999 or 2000. Around that same time, I remember there being talk about a Forgotten Reams Encyclopedia CD planned that never materialized. With D&D Beyond, and other available electronic formats these days I can't for the life of me fathom why this hasn't happened yet. I don't think the FR Wiki is officially sanctioned by WotC, but hell they've already done the lion's share of the work, just buy that, clean it up and port it over to whatever format they want and sell it as a monthly subscription.


----------



## tetrasodium (Sep 24, 2022)

No 5e style *default* setting, more 3.5 style.  Although first world seems to draw from too many settings to not be a generic baseline that can be used when useful to avoid importing too much lore & such


----------



## demonsquidgod (Sep 24, 2022)

Forgotten Realms is generic enough that it can be easily adapted to a homebrew campaign world but has an absurdly large critical mass of setting details lurking beneath that generic looking surface. It more closely matches the Fantasy Superhero Team style of current d&d than the more gritty and pulpy Greyhawk but has room for both grim darkness and goody hijinks.

I would personally love the idea of Eberron being the core setting but things like it, Dragonlance, and Dark Sun aren't as easy to adapt to a homebrew campaign world.

IME most groups either run their games in an original homebrew campaign world or have had past campaigns create enough significant changes in the FR or GH backgrounds that things still need adapting. Thus the birth of the postmodern Multiverse as the core setting makes a lot of sense, but with Forgotten Realms continuing to function as the default world.

Also, the d&d movie will be set in Forgotten Realms.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Sep 24, 2022)

I don't like the Forgotten Realms as a setting and certainly don't want it to be the Core Setting. I also don't think that there should be a core setting. However, if there is going to be one, it should be a new setting designed under the assumptions of the game (like how Eberron and Nentir Vale were designed under the assumptions of their respective editions).


----------



## James Gasik (Sep 24, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> I don't like the Forgotten Realms as a setting and certainly don't want it to be the Core Setting. I also don't think that there should be a core setting. However, if there is going to be one, it should be a new setting designed under the assumptions of the game (like how Eberron and Nentir Vale were designed under the assumptions of their respective editions).



I not only second this, I don't want another "cataclysm" to completely alter a setting just because of some rules changes.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 24, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> I think it limits the game. As far as I remember Greyhawk was where alot of the classic 1E AD&D adventures were set but there were others that were standalone and not set in any particular setting. Most people picked up a 32 pg module, ran it for a few sessions and moved on to the next and just strung them together with little regard to world at large. I'd like to see a return to that type of game to some extent.





Shiroiken said:


> Especially considering how much they're trying to detach lore from the base game, I think homebrew should become the default once again.



That's really how WotC has treated the FR in 5E: a prefab example set for homebrew and module based play.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Sep 24, 2022)

Weird Dave said:


> I'd like to stick with it - but move focus AWAY from the Sword Coast. Give me content set in Cormyr, Sembia, the Dalelands, and the Dragon Coast with rich art and fantastic maps. Cormyr's already a great starting place for adventurers with their royal recognition of adventuring charters and everything. What Azoun are we up to in the Forest Kingdom? What new threats have emerged?



ROFL I guess that's ONE take on Cormyr.

The other take it's a horrible mean-spirited place that tromps down hard on adventurers by forcing them to register a charter (which in 2E cost like, 1000g or something, I dunno about later editions) and literally beating up and throwing in jail anyone who _seems_ like they might be an adventurer but doesn't have such a charter.

It's not so much "royal recognition" (that's a helluva spin lol) as "pay up and do what we say so we can track your movements and actions or rot in jail".

So I'd say Cormyr was a pretty goddamn terrible starting location for adventurers. Not least because they're going to need an NPC to spot them the cash for the "please don't jail us" charter. I am kind of out-of-date though, maybe a more recent Azoun has reduced the "what a dick!" factor of Cormyr.

On the other hand I definitely agree with moving beyond the Sword Coast. It's played out and was never a particularly interesting or atmospheric area for adventuring. It just has a couple of big cities that make okay bases if you want a city-based adventuring group - but they're almost too big - it's unlikely any adventurers below like 10th level are going to have much influence there. But there's so much more to the FR, even if we just move inland a bit from the Sword Coast we're looking at tons of wildly atmospheric and interesting places, a lot of them quite wild and dangerous (Cormyr is not wild or dangerous, note).


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Sep 24, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> That's really how WotC has treated the FR in 5E: a prefab example set for homebrew and module based play.



I can see that argument.

However that debases the FR, frankly. It's an interesting and complex setting, and they're ignoring all of that in favour of the dullest and most straightforward part of the FR (the Sword Coast and environs), I guess because it's most "generic" and most potentially homebrew-like. Honestly that's lame. They could do better. The FR could do better.

I'd prefer to see a new setting designed for 5E/1D&D, which can then be generic and bland without just messing with an existing setting. The FR will still be popular, and might even better justify its own setting book if it's not the "generic" setting.

I mean, I am biased. I've always found the Sword Coast boring as hell, since 2E. But nothing that's happened in 5E has made it less the most boring and generic part of the FR.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Sep 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> They could do better. The FR could do better.



I agree, as someone that is generally not a fan of the Forgotten Realms. I'd actually be fine with exploring other parts of the setting. I liked Tomb of Annihilation (mostly). It would be cool if they could do something similar for Osse (if they could avoid the colonialist racism that could come with tackling that setting, that is). I just want a fantasy Australia setting book, I guess.


----------



## Uni-the-Unicorn! (Sep 24, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> Forgotten Realms will have been the default setting for a full decade when 1DD releases. Sould WotC stick with it or give a different setting a turn?



I voted for with something else, but I don’t think FR is the default setting now. There is no setting in the core books, so there is no default IMO and that is how I prefer it


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I can see that argument.
> 
> However that debases the FR, frankly. It's an interesting and complex setting, and they're ignoring all of that in favour of the dullest and most straightforward part of the FR (the Sword Coast and environs), I guess because it's most "generic" and most potentially homebrew-like. Honestly that's lame. They could do better. The FR could do better.
> 
> ...



For what it's worth in regards to OneD&D, they seem pretty serious about "The Multiverse" as the frame Setting (based on Monsters of the Multiverse and the packet flavor text), which is even more obviously homebrew  support.

The Sword Coast being so generic and blank slate is a bit more of a feature than a bug: makes it easy for new people to slide into the game, in my experience. Genre tropes are a tremendous acting aide.


----------



## Corinnguard (Sep 24, 2022)

If OneD&D is going to focus on The D&D Multiverse, maybe the OneD&D PHB will have the City of Doors in it. It's at the center of everything and is the #1 place to start and create adventuring parties whose members are from all across the Multiverse.


----------



## Gorck (Sep 24, 2022)

I answered "Keep FR" not because I _want _them to keep it, so much as I _think _they will keep it in 1DD, since I feel it's equivalent to 5.5e rather then 6e.  However, the question was vague as to whether or not the OP meant 1DD or a future edition.

Although I wouldn't mind seeing Exandria (or one of its continents) become the default setting in the future.  In my campaign, I've switched from FR to Wildemount because I find FR to be too massive and overwhelming.  Wildemount has a smaller and cozier ambiance that I prefer.  Plus, after watching Critical Role's 2nd campaign, I feel I'm more familiarized with the continent than I could ever be with FR, despite reading all the Drizzt books.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 24, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> The other take it's a horrible mean-spirited place that tromps down hard on adventurers by forcing them to register a charter (which in 2E cost like, 1000g or something, I dunno about later editions) and literally beating up and throwing in jail anyone who _seems_ like they might be an adventurer but doesn't have such a charter.
> 
> It's not so much "royal recognition" (that's a helluva spin lol) as "pay up and do what we say so we can track your movements and actions or rot in jail".



Don't forget to triple knot your peace strings too.


Ruin Explorer said:


> Cormyr is not wild or dangerous, note



Well there is the Stonelands and its roving bands of humanoids and random areas of wild and dead magic.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 24, 2022)

Uni-the-Unicorn! said:


> I voted for with something else, but I don’t think FR is the default setting now. There is no setting in the core books, so there is no default IMO and that is how I prefer it



IIRC and I could be misremembering but isnt there quite a bit of lip service to FR in the 5E core books that would imply that its the default setting for 5E?


----------



## Defender_X (Sep 24, 2022)

Mystara would be a cool default. Always felt that TSR and WOTC misssed out on not doing more with it.


----------



## TheSword (Sep 24, 2022)

Well as none of the 50% that wants an alternative can agree on what that alternative should be, I guess we’ll be sticking with the Realms.


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 24, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Well as none of the 50% that wants an alternative can agree on what that alternative should be, I guess we’ll be sticking with the Realms.



Because this is totally an official poll by Wizards.


----------



## ersatzphil (Sep 24, 2022)

Corinnguard said:


> If OneD&D is going to focus on The D&D Multiverse, maybe the OneD&D PHB will have the City of Doors in it. It's at the center of everything and is the #1 place to start and create adventuring parties whose members are from all across the Multiverse.



I mean, it's all of three paragraphs, but it is in fairness brought up in the current DMG.

Personally, I'm on the side of "keep the core three books as setting-neutral / 'generic fantasyland' as possible".


----------



## the Jester (Sep 25, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> Forgotten Realms will have been the default setting for a full decade when 1DD releases. Sould WotC stick with it or give a different setting a turn?



It's not the default, the multiverse is. Yes, FR gets the most focus, and I wish it didn't, but "default setting" it explicitly isn't.


----------



## MNblockhead (Sep 25, 2022)

I voted "Keep FR" but only because I'm fine with things as they are. FR is generic enough that I can ignore it and reflavor most adventures to fit into a home brew. I can play a "FR" adventure and really not have to worry about the wider corpus of lore and geography. I love Eberron, but I feel that I need to spend more time reading about the setting and to have a more fleshed out setting book. Nothing set in Eberron would feel like a pick-up-and-play adventure like those set in the FR.  At least for me. 

FR is a setting where you can go into as shallow or as deep as you want in a way few other settings are. I suppose Greyhawk and Mystara are similar in this way, but then why bother swapping FR out for one of them?  

For me, most setting books are lonely fun. I enjoyed reading threw Ravnica, but never tried to run a game there. Same with Eberron. Given me adventures I can run without having to cross-reference and study a setting guide.


----------



## edosan (Sep 25, 2022)

I would not mind if they really delved into the Forgotten Realms but I would also love for them to go back to a Points of Light setting with something like the Nentir Vale, lots of unexplored ruins and unknown stuff…but I am not convinced WOTC is interested in doing any setting in depth at this point so it feels like an academic discussion.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> IIRC and I could be misremembering but isnt there quite a bit of lip service to FR in the 5E core books that would imply that its the default setting for 5E?



No, not really: Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Eberron get pretty equal billing.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> No, not really: Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Eberron get pretty equal billing.



Youre probably right because its been a while since I read them other than to look something up. I might be remember reading it somewhere on a forum or it was stated (or implied) by WotC.  Has it ever been officially stated that FR is the default setting by WotC or is this just the inference because the majority of the adventures are set there?


----------



## TheSword (Sep 25, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> Because this is totally an official poll by Wizards.



You think an official poll would be different


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Sep 25, 2022)

TheSword said:


> You think an official poll would be different



I've done polls on Reddit, ENworld, and D&D Beyond with the exact same question before and gotten completely different results.

An official poll or a poll on a different site would *absolutely *have different results. So that eyeroll should really be directed at your unsupported claim.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> Youre probably right because its been a while since I read them other than to look something up. I might be remember reading it somewhere on a forum or it was stated (or implied) by WotC.  Has it ever been officially stated that FR is the default setting by WotC or is this just the inference because the majority of the adventures are set there?



WotC has always sworn up and down that FR is not the default Settijg for 5E, just their main well for pre-written modular material. A lot of their books explicitly go against FR lore, too, like Volo's version of Yuan-Ti use Greyhawk lore instead.


----------



## TheSword (Sep 25, 2022)

Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> I've done polls on Reddit, ENworld, and D&D Beyond with the exact same question before and gotten completely different results.
> 
> An official poll or a poll on a different site would *absolutely *have different results. So that eyeroll should really be directed at your unsupported claim.



I don’t doubt you have different results. That’s the point…. No one can agree. I just doubt you have conclusive results. My claim is the default until someone demonstrates otherwise.

Or can you direct me to one of your polls that does have a majority of people picking one new campaign setting?


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> WotC has always sworn up and down that FR is not the default Settijg for 5E, just their main well for pre-written modular material. A lot of their books explicitly go against FR lore, too, like Volo's version of Yuan-Ti use Greyhawk lore instead.



After your first response I started thinking not even counting DMs Guild there's quite a bit of material 5E that's not FR. I didn't know that wizards have said that FR isn't the default setting. Makes me wonder why so many people, including myself, think that it is?


----------



## HaroldTheHobbit (Sep 25, 2022)

My players are FR lore nerds, so why not. But in my opinion 5e core and splats are still pretty world agnostic, as it should be.  Campaigns and adventures are easy to port to whatever setting you fancy.

As to the D&D content development over the last years, product focus on new and younger players, and a - by the looks of it - move to digital platforms with subscription and micro payment business models, I don't really see why FR shouldn't be the one setting, more integrated in the core. Other settings seem to be done in a more and more left-handed way, ie look at Spelljammer. There's probably no longer any need to cater to grognard nostalgia for profit and popularity. So just make FR a fully integrated setting in 1DD and be done with it.


----------



## jdrakeh (Sep 25, 2022)

As much as I dislike FR, it remains the single most accessible and well known D&D setting. For that reason alone, I'm in the "yes" camp.


----------



## Uni-the-Unicorn! (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> IIRC and I could be misremembering but isnt there quite a bit of lip service to FR in the 5E core books that would imply that its the default setting for 5E?



There is lip service to many settings in the core books, it is not just FR.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> After your first response I started thinking not even counting DMs Guild there's quite a bit of material 5E that's not FR. I didn't know that wizards have said that FR isn't the default setting. Makes me wonder why so many people, including myself, think that it is?



Yeah, you can find Twitter arguments from 2015 where the WotC team correct people who assumed it is the default. Thing is, every book before Curse of Strahd in 2016 was FR by default (though the Adventures all discussed how to use different Settings), and it wasn't until 2018 when we saw a full bon-FR Setting. However, at this point, there hasn't been a fully FR based book in 2 years (unless you count Candlekeep, but I don't).


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 25, 2022)

Uni-the-Unicorn! said:


> There is lip service to many settings in the core books, it is not just FR.



Yeah @Parmandur already pointed that out. It's been so long since I read them that I only remembered FR as being more than the others, but I'm most likely wrong.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Sep 25, 2022)

I would not mind but I'd prefer if they went the ''point of light'' way with it instead of huge info dumps with every answer already answered, and go lighter with the huge catastrophic events.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Sep 25, 2022)

All of the sample names in the PHB for humans are drawn from the Forgotten Realms.

Most of the longform adventures are set in the Realms.

The Realms is the only setting with placement notes for all of the Journeys through the Radiant Citadel adventures.

The Spelljammer pre-adventure is set in the Realms.

The notion that the Forgotten Realms isn't the default setting is a little bit of gaslighting.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Yeah, you can find Twitter arguments from 2015 where the WotC team correct people who assumed it is the default.



WotC D&D website is crap nowadays, I can never find anything. Between that, D&D Beyond, Facebook, Twitter, Twitch, etc I miss alot of news/discussions because Im not on any. I wish they just pick one place to give their announcements, but I get it times have changed and Im a little behind. I think one thing that gave me the impression that FR was default is the factions in the DMG are all from the Realms doing a quick perusing just now. I know they're examples, but I think people have have a tendency to disregard or recognize this.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> All of the sample names in the PHB for humans are drawn from the Forgotten Realms.



Yet the Race section is full of Greyhawk, Eberron, and Dragonlance lore as well, that's just one random data point. As to OneD^D, it's worth noting that theybseem to have dropped suggested names entirely, and the Human writeup centers Sigil as the origin of the Hunan race.


Twiggly the Gnome said:


> Most of the longform adventures are set in the Realms.



Not all, and those that are are nominally so. They frequently include explicit guidelines on how to adapt to other Settings easily.


Twiggly the Gnome said:


> The Realms is the only setting with placement notes for all of the Journeys through the Radiant Citadel adventures.



Not so, several don't get a FR analog.


Twiggly the Gnome said:


> The Spelljammer pre-adventure is set in the Realms.



Not in the actual slipcase, the Beyond bonus material is a seperate deal.


Twiggly the Gnome said:


> The notion that the Forgotten Realms isn't the default setting is a little bit of gaslighting.



Not really, they've really consistently stated how the FR is a frequent well they draw from without being the "default" as Greyhawk was for AD&D, Mystarra was for BD&D, or the Nentir Vale was for 4E. Early on, that wasn't easy to see in practice, but they followed through and at this point have minimized the FR in print products for a long time.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> WotC D&D website is crap nowadays, I can never find anything. Between that, D&D Beyond, Facebook, Twitter, Twitch, etc I miss alot of news/discussions because Im not on any. I wish they just pick one place to give their announcements, but I get it times have changed and Im a little behind. I think one thing that gave me the impression that FR was default is the factions in the DMG are all from the Realms doing a quick perusing just now. I know they're examples, but I think people have have a tendency to disregard or recognize this.



Here's Crawford from 2015:


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Here's Crawford from 2015:



Makes sense


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> Makes sense



At the time, people were arguing with him that there were no non-FR books for the game after 9 months, so clearly FR was the default Setting, but after 8 years it really seems lole they meant it and had a longterm goal that they eventually got to.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Not so, several don't get a FR analog.




Nah, I double checked, there's a Forgotten Realms reference for Setting the Adventure on every one. No other setting gets that.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> Nah, I double checked, there's a Forgotten Realms reference for Setting the Adventure on every one. No other setting gets that.



Hmm, could have sworn they skipped a couple. Still,that doesn't make it a "default," especially when that's the extent of FR coverage in print for all of 2022.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> At the time, people were arguing with him that there were no non-FR books for the game after 9 months, so clearly FR was the default Setting, but after 8 years it really seems lole they meant it and had a longterm goal that they eventually got to.



At the time of that tweet there was the starter set, 3 cores, Rise of Tiamat and Horde of the Dragon Queen. So not a whole lot to argue about as far as fans go as there wasnt much of a sample size.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> At the time of that tweet there was the starter set, 3 cores, Rise of Tiamat and Horde of the Dragon Queen. So not a whole lot to argue about as far as fans go as there wasnt much of a sample size.



Which was Crawford's point, but it took a fair while to work out in the product line. And FR is definitely popular.


----------



## Minigiant (Sep 25, 2022)

Right now FR is the default setting for 5e.

But if artificer joins the One D&D PHB and Ardling and Orc are PHB 5.5e races, FR being the default setting doesn't make sense. The big one is Orc as Orc is 100% *not* accepted as normally playable in FR. Almos none of the main FR settlements would let a full-orc walk around the city. They _barely_ let half-orcs.


----------



## Uni-the-Unicorn! (Sep 25, 2022)

Twiggly the Gnome said:


> All of the sample names in the PHB for humans are drawn from the Forgotten Realms.
> 
> Most of the longform adventures are set in the Realms.
> 
> ...



But you would never know that if you don’t buy/ use any of the adventure or setting books. We only use the core books, so to me their is no default setting.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Sep 25, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> The Sword Coast being so generic and blank slate is a bit more of a feature than a bug: makes it easy for new people to slide into the game, in my experience. Genre tropes are a tremendous acting aide.



I don't actually agree at all with the first claim.

I've got 30+ years of RPG experience and have introduced new players the whole time.

I've seen absolutely no positive evidence that generic settings (or D&D-like systems, for that matter, but that's a separate discussion) are easier for people new to TTRPGs. I've seen significant negative evidence in fact, that they are not. That settings which are in some way distinctive, which have some real conceptual landmarks and "big ideas" are actually easier for truly new-to-TTRPGs players to get to grips with. Now, for experienced players you can make a case that they are, but not for genuinely new players, and it's still a fairly weak case.

The success of stuff like WoD, which was highly distinctive, and brought in huge numbers of new-to-RPGs players, as well outshining the then ultra-generic AD&D (the wilder settings like PS and DS were completely eclipsed by the FR in marketing and sales terms, and swamped in number of products) in the 1990s tends to support that, I'd argue. D&D's current success isn't because its default setting is ultra-generic to the point of being boring and forgettable, its in spite of it. Again the success of settings like Exandria (which whilst a kitchen sink, is massively less generic than the Sword Coast) tends to support the idea that being bland and lacking distinctiveness isn't a win.

As for genre tropes - that doesn't mean you _require_ or even necessarily benefit from a bland, featureless and undistinctive setting. On the contrary, genre tropes work best when there's stuff to attach them to. The Sword Coast doesn't have many of the most classic and basic fantasy genre tropes in any recognisable form because it's so extremely bland. It was never designed to be bland, of course, it's just that it's the edge component of a larger and more distinctive setting, and was designed to function as part of a whole. By isolating it, WotC created something extremely un-compelling.


----------



## CleverNickName (Sep 25, 2022)

I've got nothing against Forgotten Realms, so they might as well keep it.  I haven't run a "default game setting" since high school, and I'm too invested in my homebrew setting to change to a different one.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Sep 25, 2022)

R_J_K75 said:


> Don't forget to triple knot your peace strings too.



Brb throwing my Cormyr boxed set out the window. Goddamn I had forgotten about bloody triple-knotted peace strings.


R_J_K75 said:


> Well there is the Stonelands and its roving bands of humanoids and random areas of wild and dead magic.



Sure, but other parts of the FR are awesome danger zones, and have enough towns/cities to make that stuff work too.


Levistus's_Leviathan said:


> I agree, as someone that is generally not a fan of the Forgotten Realms. I'd actually be fine with exploring other parts of the setting. I liked Tomb of Annihilation (mostly). It would be cool if they could do something similar for Osse (if they could avoid the colonialist racism that could come with tackling that setting, that is). I just want a fantasy Australia setting book, I guess.



Wait, they called the Australia-equivalent continent Aussie? Good jesus that's some next-level laziness. An Australia-inspired D&D setting could be interesting (just for god's sake don't make the Aborigine-equivalent peoples non-human or "backwards" - it seems like the FR already dodged that bullet at least), but I'm pretty sure any one that lazily concepted is doomed from the outset.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 25, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I don't actually agree at all with the first claim.
> 
> I've got 30+ years of RPG experience and have introduced new players the whole time.
> 
> ...



I'd say that Exandria makes my point, as does the sales data we've seen recently from back I'm the day about Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms and Drsgonlance against other Settings. Generic is what people tend to like, in my experience, and the sales data seems to indicate that.

The Sword Coast (as defined by the SCAG book) is actually the heart of the Forgotten Realms, aside from the Dalelands. Waterdeep is where the first short story Greenwood wrote as a child was set, and where his non-Shadowdale campaign ran for decades.


----------



## RuinousPowers (Sep 25, 2022)

I would like to see a setting where things like Dragonborn and Warlocks are deeply incorporated in the setting, and not tacked on afterward. I also think that WOTC should have moved away from the older settings entirely, maybe covering them the way they did the Planescape settings in a UA.


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 25, 2022)

Give us a Returned Abeir book you cowards


----------



## James Gasik (Sep 26, 2022)

I think Alias mentions in Curse of the Azure Bonds that experienced swordsmen adventuring in Cormyr know how to tie a peace bond so that it's easy to undo but can pass inspection.


----------



## tetrasodium (Sep 26, 2022)

Uni-the-Unicorn! said:


> But you would never know that if you don’t buy/ use any of the adventure or setting books. We only use the core books, so to me their is no default setting.



That's part of the problem.  The core rulebooks are littered with things like this one from


Spoiler: phb24



The Darkness of the Drow
Were it not for one renowned exception, the race of drow
would be universally reviled. To most, they are a race of
demon-worshiping marauders dwelling in the subterranean
depths of the Underdark, emerging only on the blackest
nights to pillage and slaughter the surface dwellers they
despise. Their society is depraved and preoccupied with the
favor of Lolth, their spider-goddess, who sanctions murder
and the extermination of entire families as noble houses
vie for position.
Yet one drow, at least, broke the mold. In the world of the
Forgotten Realms, Drizzt Do'Urden, ranger of the North, has
proven his quality as a good-hearted defender of the weak
and innocent. Rejecting his heritage and adrift in a world that
looks upon him with terror and loathing, Drizzt is a model
for those few drow who follow in his footsteps, trying to find
a life apart from the evil society of their Underdark homes.
Drow grow up believing that surface-dwelling races are
inferior, worthless except as slaves. Drow who develop a
conscience or find it necessary to cooperate with members of
other races find it hard to overcome that prejudice, especially
when they are so often on the receiving end of hatred.



and are juxtaposed with things like the dmg gods of your world section that namedrops fr and others in sections where they are similar to FR only to switch to real world examples and vague generalities when moving into structures not present in FR but present in settings like eberron/darksun in very notable forms. This particular example is so extreme that xge18 actually includes a a sidebar extending the DMG gods of your world pantheon philosophy or force subsections.

If your goal is to run a game with an fr or fr-like setting then it appears very generic yes.  If the GM's goal is to run a game with a setting that goes in different directions the gm is in for quite the task fighting the boatloads of FR lore in so many player facing areas while left with an empty void of things they could point at outside the setting book.  Eberron & darksun elves/halflings are quite different from FR & Greyhawk elves/halflings in ways that should be on the ground levels of low hanging fruit but players arrive already certain that what is written in the phb  & the associated lore is gospel for those two.

FR is not just "default" it's fan service levels of "*default*"


----------



## Haplo781 (Sep 26, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> That's part of the problem.  The core rulebooks are littered with things like this one from
> 
> 
> Spoiler: phb24
> ...



Which is why 1DD needs to absolutely commit to making race strictly biology and relegate culture to backgrounds.


----------



## MockingBird (Sep 26, 2022)

I wouldn't be upset if they used Wildemount


----------



## Digdude@1970 (Sep 26, 2022)

Id love to see an all new setting allowing and embracing the new races, backgrounds, and classes. In with the new.


----------



## Knight_Marshal (Sep 26, 2022)

I would love to see the old Mystara world redone.


----------



## Aldarc (Sep 26, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Here's Crawford from 2015:



This is what I came here to say. I don't think that the Forgotten Realms is the default setting. I believe that WotC views the "D&D Multiverse" as the setting, which is honestly a more brand-positive way to approach their IP. It's similar to the 4e "everything is core" approach, albeit with their settings: i.e., "it's all the default setting because it's all part of the D&D Multiverse."


----------



## Clint_L (Sep 26, 2022)

I think the Forgotten Realms work well as a default vanilla fantasy setting, so there's no reason to reinvent the wheel. Going with something like Dark Suns would be tricky as it is a very specific kind of fantasy that would not work for a lot of DMs. Settings like that have to feel optional.

One thing I would like to see in every adventure book is more space given to how to incorporate each adventure into the different official settings, so instead of a few words we actually get a reasonable entry on how and where this adventure would work in Eberron, Exandria, etc.


----------



## Gorck (Sep 26, 2022)

Clint_L said:


> One thing I would like to see in every adventure book is more space given to how to incorporate each adventure into the different official settings, so instead of a few words we actually get a reasonable entry on how and where this adventure would work in Eberron, Exandria, etc.



I haven't read every 5e adventure book, but I like that they did exactly this for Tales From The Yawning Portal.  Maybe because it consists of several unrelated adventures originally based in different settings that they tied together in one book. 

Unfortunately, they didn't have suggestions on where to run the adventures in Wildemount, so I spent a few weeks converting it on my own.  So naturally, just after I began running the first adventure for my daughter, she decided that she wanted to try her hand at DMing.  All that hard work and effort to convert it and now we're not even playing it.  But it was for a good cause.  Anything to encourage my little pumpkin to express her creativity.


----------



## vagabundo (Sep 27, 2022)

Is keep it. BUT I'd give it a grey box gazetteer overview and maybe one or two starting places and then tell DMs that it's there are a multiverse of FRs and to take from the setting books what they like.  

In the DM guide maybe Loudwater or Neverwinter, somewhere in the Dale's and somewhere down SE of Fearun. And let DMs loose...


----------

