I know that, for many fans of old-school Dungeons & Dragons, Ed Greenwood’s Forgotten Realms represents a decisive (and unwelcome) break from the game’s early days, both in content and especially in presentation. I don’t agree with that assessment, though this isn’t the place to rehearse that entire argument. What I will say is that revisiting TSR’s Forgotten Realms products from the late 1980s through the 1990s, I find a body of work that is not the betrayal its detractors claim, but is instead a mixed bag – occasionally frustrating, frequently ambitious, and at times genuinely impressive.
A good case in point is The Ruins of Myth Drannor, a 1993 boxed set detailing the fabled elven “City of Song.” Myth Drannor had long loomed large in the background of the setting. For years prior to this set’s release, Greenwood referenced it repeatedly as a shining example of magical harmony undone by hubris and catastrophe. Consequently, when the boxed set finally appeared, I eagerly snapped it up.
From the first time I read about it, I imagined Myth Drannor as one of the great fallen cities of the Realms. Its destruction defined much of the Forgotten Realms’ melancholy grandeur. The Realms, at least as I understood them, were not a setting on the ascent but a world in decline, a place of fading glories and lingering ruins, closer in spirit to pulp fantasy than to high heroic triumphalism. Myth Drannor is where this comes into sharp focus.
Transforming such a mythic ruin into a playable location was no doubt a challenge. Myth Drannor is not a megadungeon in the traditional sense. Rather, it is a shattered metropolis sprawled across the forest of Cormanthyr. Its districts, academies, towers, temples, vaults, and magical zones warped by a magic effect that once protected the city. TSR had previously attempted little else on this scale. One might point to Dwellers of the Forbidden City as an early precursor, though the comparison only goes so far. In spirit, its closest analog may be Chaosium’s Big Rubble for RuneQuest, which is still, in my opinion, the gold standard for “ruin crawl” locales.
In many respects, The Ruins of Myth Drannor succeeds admirably in its goals. Greenwood presents the city as an environment. It is effectively a mini-sandbox, a vast urban wilderness suitable for exploration, salvage, factional conflict, and long-term campaigns built around survival amid arcane devastation. The conceptual foundation is solid. The boxed set offers history, factions, current inhabitants, and numerous adventure hooks. This is all good stuff. Where it falters is in execution.
The set does not consistently provide the Dungeon Master with the tools necessary to bring so large a space to life in play. The maps are expansive and the descriptions evocative, but there is surprisingly little in the way of random encounter tables, stocking guidelines, event generators, or even name lists to help a referee improvise within such a vast environment. Instead, we are given several more fully fleshed-out adventures and a handful of small, somewhat uninspired mini-dungeons that can be dropped in as needed. Those adventures are serviceable, but they do not quite match the promise implied by the scale of the city itself.
This absence of these kinds of referee tools is all the more striking because the physical presentation of the boxed set is impressive. The poster maps are sweeping, delineating districts and geography. They convey scale beautifully. One can easily imagine months of play wandering the overgrown avenues and shattered towers. Yet, that same scale exposes a weakness. Much of the city is described in broad strokes. The maps suggest more than the text delivers or indeed could deliver.
The background material is quintessentially Greenwoodian, dense with names, lineages, magic, and history. For readers invested in the Realms as a setting, this lore is rich and rewarding. For referees seeking immediately usable material, however, it can feel overwhelming. Even as someone who once delighted in “Realmslore,” I occasionally found myself wishing that some of the word count devoted to ancient history had instead gone toward practical game tools.
One element the boxed set gets absolutely right is its intended level range. The Ruins of Myth Drannor is not for novice characters. The ruins teem with formidable threats, like elven and mind flayer liches, demons, devils, magical constructs, and strange, magic-eating abominations. These are adversaries suited to mid and high-level characters. For referees who enjoy high-level play – and who know how difficult it can be to challenge powerful characters – Myth Drannor fills a genuine need. It offers a compelling and dangerous playground for experienced adventurers.
In the end, I think The Ruins of Myth Drannor exemplifies much of TSR’s output during this period. It is ambitious, atmospheric, and lavishly presented. It's also frustrating. It gestures toward an open-ended and exploratory style of play that strongly matches old school sensibilities, but it stops short of fully embracing the procedural support such play demands.
Even so, I still very much like this boxed set. When it was released, I used it and mined it for material to use in my campaign. Its flaws required work on my part as referee, of course, but the raw material was there, waiting to be shaped. Perhaps that is the most old-school aspect of it after all: not a perfectly engineered product, but a rich, uneven trove of ideas demanding engagement.

I'm always searching for 'lost cities' (I really dig that theme) so I'll check this!
ReplyDeleteThanks!
I could tell there had not been much play testing. I went through and wrote out by hand all the overlapping dweomers and effects that might plague exploring characters and it was well over a page of dense, single spaced text. Having to check down a list that large at intervals just to run the setting as it states it is intended is ridiculous. Still, nice maps. If you want to do it yourself myth Drannor kit to riff off of this works.
ReplyDeleteWhen did TSR products ever contain ‘referee tools’?
ReplyDeleteI've always been averse to published worlds. Even though Greyhawk and Blackmoor and the ridiculously misnamed Mystara and FR and even Ravenloft(!) were homebrewed by actual DMs first (FR even predated D&D or the invention of the DM!), I've never played them (except when absolutely forced by the module - looking at you, Krynn. Heck, through accident, we didn't even play Ravenloft in Barovia!)
ReplyDeleteVaguely stock fantasy with uneven levels of modernization - from Dark Ages to Early Colonial, rare alien incursions, underworlds, weird. Politics was almost strictly economic/military. The setting - to this day - are primarily procedural (we roll for civil unrest, political favor, diplomacy, festivals, etc). Villages, towns, city-states and countries are just "supercharacters" with reaction rolls, morale, etc.
I just remember how much Greyhawk slowed things down, and Mystara was fine as optional background noise in some modules, but otherwise simply provided small support for the already generically applied older "Known World." So I was probably primed to absolutely recoil against DragonLance(tm) and Krynn, so when I saw my friends pick up FR I was a hard pass. When I did finally look at it, I found it much more fun than Greyhawk, and infinitely less dorky and bland than Mystara, but I could not conceive how it would make my job as a DM any easier or more immersive. It was more like a tale regaled by a fellow DM: cool story, but not my story.
I bet I'd really enjoy The Ruins of Myth Drannor, as long I merely read it without implementing any of it in an actual game.
Well, that's like, your opinion, man...
DeleteBecause there are some of us who do enjoy using made campaign settings. Some DMs don't have the time to flesh out a game world as much as you do. Some of us see what's in the material, it's good enough for our needs, and we use it. Some of us may even MODIFY the game world to fit to what we want. There is nothing wrong is doing any of that.
This is something that I've encountered over the 45 years of gaming: the arrogance of DMs about their home brewed game worlds. Some DM do come off saying how superior their game world is to any published world. Well I can tell you from experience, this is not always the case. I've played in some home brewed worlds, and some of them were just awful. Either nothing made sense, or it was over the top with magic or such little magic, characters struggled. The worst is when the game world just becomes a home for the DMs favorite NPCs and you're just along for the ride: the Mary Sue campaign.
Now I've also played in some home brew game worlds where they were really fun. Really cool backstories, or unique geography, or a twist on common tropes. So a DM can have a good home brew campaign, if he has the time and creativity to do it. from my experience, it always come down to time.
But from my experience, the bad ones outnumber the good ones. I can't help but roll my eyes and think, "here's another one who thinks his home brew campaign is better than anything else.", and take what that person says with a huge grain a of salt.
I also do not comprehend how one would even play the game as I understand it without wandering monsters and other procedural randomizers. I don't care if you could write enough dramatic backstory content to fill a family Bible, it could never be as true, unpredictable...or plausible...as a stock of decent simple tables would. Encounters and reaction rolls in the hands of decent and efficient referee writes fills in the backstory as you go, seamlessly and without exposition. Having to come up on the fly with why a hundred goblins are stomping through the woods a quarter mile away is natural.
ReplyDeleteMyth Drannorgrad.
ReplyDeleteYeah, this set needed alot of work. I remember TSR having a big eratta document for it, and a bunch of other products in the late 90s on their website.
ReplyDeleteAgreed that "Big Rubble" set the standard. "Parlainth" for Earthdawn, is another great "ruincrawl" worth checking out.
How does 1988's Ruins of Adventure compare as a Forgotten Realms "ruin crawl"?
ReplyDeleteI liked playing Pool of Radiance the computer game, but I thought it was also proof that the best of computer gaming would always be its own thing, never capable of replicating "real" D&D.
DeleteThen TSR came out with Ruins of Adventure (well, to tell the truth DragonLance had done it 3 years earlier, but I had mistaken that for an abberation off the path, not the new path.)
I was drifting toward Rolemaster at the time. I thought this was because I was in search of something new. But in fact, I was in search of something old - something before DragonLance.
Instead,TSR leaned in to their moneymakers, and decided to devise ways to make The Game more closely resemble computer games.
For example, in The Pool of Radiance, attributes are slightly inflated beyond the AD&D averages and there are things like Gauntlets of Strength that are useless to some character types (15? STR female half-elves maybe? I don't remember.) The first thing makes the game more enjoyable and satisfaction more certain. The second plays like a glitch. In OD&D, the first would be an unwelcome neutralization of risk, the second would be a "realistic" enhancement.
Take those discrepancies and retrofit the video game's rules and procedures onto an adventure module, complete with boxed narration*, flowcharts, and yes, even the gauntlet limitations, and the entire feel of the game changed. Now to be fair, I never played or DM's Ruins, I only read it (one of the last TSR things I read, I'd guess. Stopped receiving Dragon by '90.) But what I read was a clear picture of what I call "Skinsuit D&D." Superficially it looked like D&D, but not really. It looked like a different entity, wearing the stitched up flesh of what used to be D&D. You know how Buffalo Bill never quite finished his woman-suit in Silence of the Lambs, so that we never saw him wearing it?
I think he would have looked an awful lot like Ruins of Adventure if we had. I will give TSR this: they did a great job providing an introductory module to new players who entered via their interest in video games. It's just too bad that it laid the groundwork to permanently replace the original game with something (in my opinion) that eventually became an entirely different animal.
I mean, even Gygax at his most "authoritative" would have never dreamed of constructing a straightline railroad through the facade of a sprawling expanse of fabulous ruins.
*Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe TSR introduced boxed text in Tomb of Horrors(?) to standardize tournament competition, not to proscribe local refereeing.
"It looked like a different entity, wearing the stitched up flesh of what used to be D&D. You know how Buffalo Bill never quite finished his woman-suit in Silence of the Lambs, so that we never saw him wearing it?"
DeleteOoof, thanks for putting that in my head this morning. - a different anon
The challenges and good qualities you describe are how I feel about much of the materials from that time. I loved them back then and do still to this day, but have had that feeling where I didn't know where to start with adventuring. It often feels like back then there was an expectation that the DM would put in a lot of time writing their own material and adventures, using the setting for a backdrop and inspiration.
ReplyDelete