Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dargoth 10-30-03, 09:36 PM	Well someone posted the TOC for Draconomican and guess what the FR has been robbed again Not happy with stealing the monsters from COSQ and putting them in the generic Fiend Folio we have now been robbed of the Dracolich and Shadow Dragon which will now appear in the Generic Draconomican! I was under the impression that Greyhawk/Oreoth was the Core setting NOT the Forgotten Realms Am I only the only one whose PO at this? Signed One mightly annoyed FR FAN
Mirtek 10-30-03, 09:42 PM	We should make a list of a) How often GH robbed FR b) How often FR robbed GH Then we could compare who robbed more than the other. Never forget that many of our "favorite" FR critters (like the Drow) come from Greyhawk
Dargoth 10-30-03, 09:49 PM	Originally posted by Mirtek We should make a list of a) How often GH robbed FR b) How often FR robbed GH Then we could compare who robbed more than the other. Never forget that many of our "favorite" FR critters (like the Drow) come from Greyhawk Well seeing as how Greyhawk is the core setting everyone has to take stuff from it After all the Monster Manual 1 and 2 and Fiend Folio are all core books and are therefore "Greyhawk books" Greyhawk is the bland generic setting while the FR, Dragonlance and Eberon (or what ever its called) are the different settings. Now if generic D&D keeps robbing the exotic settings of there stuff then all the settings will become the same
Wooly Rupert 10-30-03, 09:57 PM	I, personally, am more tweaked about Greyhawk being the official campaign world than anything else. I have a serious amount of dislike for Greyhawk. I liked it better in 2nd edition, when there was no particular default setting.
Chamber 10-30-03, 10:27 PM	who cares...FR is by far the better...if you dont play core you shouldnt be annoyed by the theft.:b:
Gadodel 10-30-03, 10:31 PM	Many of the spells started with GH and FR has no problem using them. Bigby's Hand spells, Tenser's Transformation, Mordenkainen's spells etc. It is not robbery...it is sharing.
Faraer 10-30-03, 10:44 PM	Ed's original Dragon articles didn't intend everyone to only use the material in the Realms (which hadn't yet been published). The dracolich, crawling claw and several other Realms monsters made it into the second edition Monstrous Manual. There's no problem here, at least if the Draconomicon credits the original creators adequately. (Greyhawk being the 'core setting' means little except it providing proper nouns (gods, wizards) here and there.) The problem is when elements of D&D are imposed on the Realms, from magic shops to bard-default gnomes.
Shemeska the Marauder 10-30-03, 10:45 PM	Hmm... lets see how often has FR lately been poaching ideas from Planescape and co-opting it intirely for its own purpose. Abishai in the MoF no longer integral parts of the Baatezu, but rather servants of Tiamat Genasi, Aasimar, Tieflings, and other planetouched being embraced by FR as its own Alhoon being only printed in MoF and lots of people assuming it to be FR only now *sigh* I like FR but its starting to get a bit too self centered in such regards for my tastes at this rate
Faraer 10-30-03, 10:53 PM	Gary Gygax borrowed lots of stuff from mythology, legend, fantasy fiction, newspaper stories, his friends, etc. and put it in D&D. Planescape took abishai and Tiamat and most of its elements from the Gygaxian Greyhawk-associated planes and redefined them in some cases. It's a pot constantly stirred, and if you prefer original to later contexts you may not like the appropriations, but philosophically it is not theft. The Realms were far more a dumping-ground for everything TSR thought of during the 1990s than they are now. (Alhoon are a Realms creation that first appeared in Dragon #185, though, and I could do without planetouched entirely.)
Wooly Rupert 10-30-03, 11:18 PM	Originally posted by Faraer The Realms were far more a dumping-ground for everything TSR thought of during the 1990s than they are now. Actually, that's a lot of the reason I don't like Greyhawk: everything is just kinda there, with no real rhyme or reason. Admittedly, the planet Toril did get a lot of stuff added on -- Kara-Tur, Maztica, Al-Qadim... The Forgotten Realms is a part of Toril, not it's entirety. And at least it all fits in. Take away the fantasy elements, you've got Earth. That's why I like the Realms -- it fits together, and it's a nice twist on the known, which greatly appeals to me. As for the plane-touched, I have no problem with that. Again, it makes some sense. Portals have long been common in the Realms, and certain areas have a history of hosting outsiders. Hellgate Keep and Myth Drannor both hosted a large outsider population for a long time, for example. The genasi work because there are two nations that were originally founded by outsiders! Calimshan and Memnon were originally founded and populated by outsiders, so it makes sense that their bloodline should remain. Thay, too, would prolly have a good population of outsiders. Not only is Kossuth a major deity there, but they've done a lot of traffic with the Lower Planes -- like the one major guy they imprisoned for a few centuries...
Masakado 10-30-03, 11:56 PM	Aside from the inside jokes (lots of places on Oerth are named after friends & family members of the EGG), there's a wealth of very well thought out stuff in the GH campaign, & the campaign world has more than it's share of classic adventures. White Plume Mountain, the "Giants" series, Vault of the Drow, the "Slaver" series... All good stuff. I was actually a bit heartened to hear that there was going to be a refocusing on GH as the core world, as it's suffered from a serious bit of neglect over the years. FR will probably remain my favored setting, but I still respect GH because that's where I started off.
Damarkos 10-31-03, 01:39 AM	i'd like to point out a technicality here: Monster Manual 2 and Fiend Folio are NOT considered core books. neither is the draconomicon. make sure u fully understand what a core book IS before u complain. the core books have always been since the release of 3e the PHB, the DMG, and the first Monster Manual. That's it. the other books are not core, and are thus completely optional. the draconomicon is completely optional. it is not "greyhawk now" just because its released without being specifically for FR. so calm down about things being "stolen" from the realms. FR wouldn't exist if it didn't steal things from Greyhawk in the first place. lets also remember that FR and Greyhawk being completely different universes/cosmologies is a completely 3e idea. in 2nd ed and 1st ed FR and Greyhawk both existed in the prime material plane and all one needed to do was either plane shift or spelljam to get to another world. and finally, i think u r overeacting bigtime. oooooh, now ppl who don't like FR can use shadow dragons and dracoliches. lets cry and complain about how favorite campaign setting is getting robbed. please. shadow dragons and dracoliches arent exactly all that original anyway. its a dragon, its from the shadows, its a shadow dragon. its a dragon, its a lich, its a dracolich. i have serious doubts either of these monsters even appeared in FR stuff first. im not sure, i could be wrong, but they might have popped up in the 1e modules (which were greyhawk) first. which makes your whole stealing arguement moot. and finally, why should dragons be able to become liches ONLY in FR? thats stupid. and why should dragons with shadow powers be ONLY FR? thats stupid too. itd be one thing if like other books were stealing something blatantly characteristic of FR (like say if Harpers started showing up in Greyhawk) but shadow dragons and dracoliches are pretty generic in concept. grow up.
Tempus665 10-31-03, 04:29 AM	Originally posted by Dargoth Am I only the only one whose PO at this? Signed One mightly annoyed FR FAN Nope. You´re not the only one :b: I think this falls into the category Blasphemy! It also shows that most books don´t have an awful lot of new stuff.
Gadodel 10-31-03, 04:38 AM	Well FR will be robbing GH again, soon from what I've heard. Remember The Rary the Traitor story? How he killed Otiluke and Tenser... Well, FR; Khelben is supposed to go on a rampage...permanently killing two important NPC's...don't know who though...
Dargoth 10-31-03, 04:56 AM	Originally posted by Gadodel Well FR will be robbing GH again, soon from what I've heard. Remember The Rary the Traitor story? How he killed Otiluke and Tenser... Well, FR; Khelben is supposed to go on a rampage...permanently killing two important NPC's...don't know who though... where did you hear that?
Gadodel 10-31-03, 05:53 AM	Well, I can't divulge that... GH taught us that even heroes can die and stay dead. FR will be taking this route too. They started with Azoun, my fav character...but two shall fall that will make folks respect FR even more.
Harlamond 10-31-03, 06:42 AM	Can some one explain to me what the big deal is I don’t understand why any one would care if shadow dragons are included into this new product it will just mean that DM’s in other settings will get a new nasty monster to play with then again I only play in the FR setting so maybe I’m missing some thing.
Tempus665 10-31-03, 08:08 AM	Well, for one, it robs the FR of its uniqueness. :(
Harlamond 10-31-03, 08:48 AM	Originally posted by Tempus665 Well, for one, it robs the FR of its uniqueness. :( Ok I can see where you’re coming from but the uniqueness to me comes more from the individual characters, organizations, and cities no one can ever steal the uniqueness that is Forgotten Realms the setting the lore is untouchable to the other settings unless they decide to try and clone it and even if they do it will only be a second rate setting compared to the greatest setting of them all FR. Also the publication of FR specific creations in other core books I would think helps bring in more customers to this setting than any other as long as WotC pays its dues to that creation, just like they did in the DMG when they published the ever popular Red Wizard PRC they put in a little write up giving Faerun and Thay the proper respect and I would expect they’ll do the same for any thing realms specific be it Forgotten Realms or another setting at least that’s what I’m hoping will happen.
Kieran Bloodthorne 10-31-03, 08:50 AM	Originally posted by Gadodel Well, I can't divulge that... GH taught us that even heroes can die and stay dead. FR will be taking this route too. They started with Azoun, my fav character...but two shall fall that will make folks respect FR even more. Well if you can't say who or what, can you say approximately when this will come out? ::Speaks in Dr. Evil Voice:: Throw me a freakin bone, here :D
Sirius_Black 10-31-03, 09:22 AM	Originally posted by Dargoth where did you hear that? Ditto. Please let us know a source for your information.
Amaranthine 10-31-03, 10:59 AM	Shadow Dragons have been a fixture in the Hellfurnaces (a GH mountain range) since 1st edition. Monster Manual II (1st ed) had them.
Plectrum 10-31-03, 12:49 PM	Dracoliches were first mentioned in the FR in the novels of the Moonshae trilogy (i think:confused: ) this novel was not even origionally written for the Realms so how can Dracoliches be origionally from the Realms. :D :fight!: :devil:
Faraer 10-31-03, 01:29 PM	Ed created dracoliches for Spellfire, and they first appeared there, with a game writeup in Dragon #110.
Mirtek 10-31-03, 01:31 PM	Originally posted by Plectrum Dracoliches were first mentioned in the FR in the novels of the Moonshae trilogy (i think:confused: ) this novel was not even origionally written for the Realms so how can Dracoliches be origionally from the Realms. :D :fight!: :devil: Why do you think the sequel to the Moonshae Trilogy wasn't written for the FR? The Moonshae Trilogy were the first FR novels ever, and the novel where this dracolich (created by Talos, long before Sammaster) appeared was Prophet of Moonshae, the first novel of the Druidhome Trilogy which was the sequel to the Moonshae Trilogy
Derulbaskul 10-31-03, 09:10 PM	Originally posted by Dargoth (snip) Not happy with stealing the monsters from COSQ and putting them in the generic Fiend Folio we have now been robbed of the Dracolich and Shadow Dragon which will now appear in the Generic Draconomican! (snip) Hehe... I don't normally read the FR vs GH threads as they are largely a waste of time and simply a place for infantile rantings of semi-formed minds. Anyway, the shadow dragon was originally a Greyhawk creation. They were red dragons transformed by shadowstuff in one of Oerth's mountain ranges (just can't remember which range). Perhaps your righteous indignation would be better aimed elsewhere? Cheers D, a fan of both FR and GH (but I prefer the former)
Endur_Stonehelm 10-31-03, 10:27 PM	The Cult of the Dragon is unique to FR. But neither Shadow Dragons nor Dracolich's are unique to FR. Both existed before TSR ever published FR. Originally posted by Dargoth Not happy with stealing the monsters from COSQ and putting them in the generic Fiend Folio we have now been robbed of the Dracolich and Shadow Dragon which will now appear in the Generic Draconomican!
Wooly Rupert 11-01-03, 12:33 AM	Originally posted by Damarkos im not sure, i could be wrong, but they might have popped up in the 1e modules (which were greyhawk) first. Hate to break it to you, but not all 1st edition modules were for Greyhawk. Under Illefarn, for example, was 1st edition and set in the Realms. I think that the first Dragginglance modules were also 1st edition.
Straploknight 11-01-03, 11:30 PM	Originally posted by Damarkos its a dragon, its from the shadows, its a shadow dragon. its a dragon, its a lich, its a dracolich. Or maybe its Shag Dor the Shadow Lich Dragon, shaginating the countryside or not ?
Israfel666 11-02-03, 01:48 PM	1- Gadodel, how is it you can tell us about this supposed "Khelben rampage" and not about where you heard of it? 2- This thread popped up a really serious question in my mind. In "official" 3e (though not IMC) Toril is no longer part of the general Prime Material Plane and the Planescape cosmology. Therefore, you can't get from Toril to Oerth (or viceversa) like Elminster, Mordenkainen and a couple other wizards did when they ate something together in some 2e articles. But then, how on Toril can Faerunian spellcasters still use Greyhawk-made spells?? (you know, Mordy's Disjunction, Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer, etc..) Since WotC chose to separate Greyhawk from Faerun in 3e, I think they should at least have bothered to change all the names of the spell (like they are in the SRD, eg. Mage's Disjunction, Mnemonic Enhancer, etc.), or, even better, to attribute them to Faerunian creators.
Selvarin 11-02-03, 08:20 PM	Originally posted by Gadodel Well, I can't divulge that... GH taught us that even heroes can die and stay dead. FR will be taking this route too. They started with Azoun, my fav character...but two shall fall that will make folks respect FR even more. Ummm....Hmm. Oh great, the one uber-wizard in FR I like will go on a rampage. Hopefully the two he takes out will be characters I could care less about. If Khelben is made into a villian, though, I will be peeved and I won't be thinking 'respect' if such is the case. (For whatever reason, LN characters get the short end of the stick in the Realms.)
the_heart 11-03-03, 06:04 AM	Originally posted by Dargoth Well someone posted the TOC for Draconomican and guess what the FR has been robbed again Not happy with stealing the monsters from COSQ and putting them in the generic Fiend Folio we have now been robbed of the Dracolich and Shadow Dragon which will now appear in the Generic Draconomican! I was under the impression that Greyhawk/Oreoth was the Core setting NOT the Forgotten Realms Am I only the only one whose PO at this? Signed One mightly annoyed FR FAN nah!! let's be honest if someone likes the monsters they are gonna use em anyway, wherever they are printed. i steal monsters from anywhere i can to use in my FRC. as mentioned, organisations would be a different kettle o' fish....
Gez 11-03-03, 09:51 AM	Originally posted by Dargoth http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/troll.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/complain.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/bomb.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/tantrum.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/blotto.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/tears.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/heh.gif http://www.nutkinland.com/images/smilies/smiles/lolbonk.gif :rofl:
Another Gnome 11-03-03, 02:44 PM	I wonder if this should be considered robbing FR for an idea, or just a strange inside joke... http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/boed_gallery/75089.jpg The illustration is from the Book of Exalted Deeds, and while I don't know what exactly she is (probably an arch-celestial or something), a dark-skinned twin-scimitar-wielding elf called Gwynharwyf really made my day when I noticed this in the art gallery... :twitch:
ENHenry 11-03-03, 03:34 PM	Originally posted by Dargoth Not happy with stealing the monsters from COSQ and putting them in the generic Fiend Folio we have now been robbed of the Dracolich and Shadow Dragon which will now appear in the Generic Draconomican! *A-HEM* Dracoliches were predated by Dragotha, The Undead Dragon from S2 White Plume Mountain. Shadow Dragons made an appearance in the Monster Manual 2, predating the First Forgotten Realms Grey Boxed Set. Drow, Driders, yochlol, and all things "Lolthian" made their debut in the D1-2 Descent into the Depths, and Q1 Queen of the Demonweb pits - products generically set in Greyhawk. A LOT of "realmsian" stuff got its start in Greyhawk, or generic D&D.
Selvarin 11-04-03, 01:58 AM	Originally posted by ENHenry *A-HEM* Dracoliches were predated by Dragotha, The Undead Dragon from S2 White Plume Mountain. Shadow Dragons made an appearance in the Monster Manual 2, predating the First Forgotten Realms Grey Boxed Set. Drow, Driders, yochlol, and all things "Lolthian" made their debut in the D1-2 Descent into the Depths, and Q1 Queen of the Demonweb pits - products generically set in Greyhawk. A LOT of "realmsian" stuff got its start in Greyhawk, or generic D&D. To the best of my knowledge, 'undead dragons' per se were not properly statted before Ed Greenwood did so in his Cult of the Dragon article in Dragon #110 (June 1986). As for Dragothra, that dragon was unstatted until the 2E AD&D RPGA adventure, Dragothra's Lair (written by Bruce Cordell), was released. The copyright for it is 2001, it was designed to 'supplement and showcase' Return to White Plume Mountain, which came out in December 1999 (I guess Dragothra's lair was tested and developed in 2000 by RPGA gamers?). Just saying. As for 'robbing', Greyhawk was long the testing ground for many creatures and spells, which have since become standard fare in most campaign worlds. Since the Forgotten Realms has become the main supported WotC/D&D setting, it just makes sense that more stuff these days debuts or gets showcased in the Realms first before making its way to the big D&D stew pot that everyone scopps from. I don't see it as 'taking away' from the Realms so let's not get carried away here.
Dargoth 11-04-03, 02:43 AM	And I should point out that Dracolich stats first appeared in Waterdeep and the North a 1ed FR Supplement and from the begining where tied to the Cult of the Dragon oh and by the way I suggest you remove all Great Wyrms from the other settings to because up until the FR boxset there where no Great Wyrm dragons
Selvarin 11-04-03, 03:40 AM	Originally posted by Dargoth And I should point out that Dracolich stats first appeared in Waterdeep and the North a 1ed FR Supplement and from the begining where tied to the Cult of the Dragon oh and by the way I suggest you remove all Great Wyrms from the other settings to because up until the FR boxset there where no Great Wyrm dragons FR1 Waterdeep & the North was published in 1987, and pulled the dracolich stats from the CotD article published the previous year, but I'll not nitpick. ;)
Faraer 11-04-03, 10:21 AM	Originally posted by Selvarin ...but I'll not nitpick. ;) I will. Dragotha was first detailed in Dragon #134 (1988), before the Adventurers' Guild module. The concept of an undead dragon preceded dracoliches into print, but dracoliches originated in Spellfire and Dragon #110, as I said.
ENHenry 11-04-03, 04:10 PM	No problems with the preceding at all; what I take umbrage to is that somehow there is a "competition" going between the Realms and Greyhawk - I give rabid Greyhawk fans the same grief. :) To assume the concept of an undead dragon was solely Ed's is incorrect, but to also assume that there isn't cross-pollination going on between different designers and game products all the time would be equally incorrect. It would be like saying the USSR were the only ones being sneaky in the Cold War. :)
Cunning Linguist 11-04-03, 06:41 PM	Did you guys know that Grayhawk Forum has this same tread, only GH is robbed again by FR..
Dargoth 11-04-03, 07:07 PM	Originally posted by Faraer I will. Dragotha was first detailed in Dragon #134 (1988), before the Adventurers' Guild module. The concept of an undead dragon preceded dracoliches into print, but dracoliches originated in Spellfire and Dragon #110, as I said. Either way THERE NOT GREYHAWK monsters. This thing with the Draconomicon is just the latest symptom Monsters of Faerun was the biggest THEFT where a book full of Monsters related to Forgotten Realms had to be published with out the FR logo because the bean counters wanted the GH nuts to buy it to. Then theres the whole Fluffy vs Crunch fiasco where realms material was sacrificed in order to create a book more suitable to Non FR fans The Draconomicon is just the latest in the line of injustices being done to the FR
Cunning Linguist 11-04-03, 07:13 PM	I think they want to sell of there stuff to the D&D nuts. To few GH nuts to make any amount of cash from them. *Wish I had some sales nr. for the FR vs Core books ratio*
Shemeska the Marauder 11-04-03, 09:24 PM	Originally posted by Dargoth Monsters of Faerun was the biggest THEFT where a book full of Monsters related to Forgotten Realms had to be published with out the FR logo because the bean counters wanted the GH nuts to buy it to. Monsters of Faerun went disgustingly out of its way to poach from Planescape. Lets start with Abishai, then move our way up to the various types of Genasi and other planetouched. Neither of those groups, with the exception of the Fey'ri, are FR specific, yet they're included in an FR specific monster compilation. I'm sorry, Abishai are Baatezu, not specifically servitors of Tiamat.
Dargoth 11-04-03, 09:32 PM	Originally posted by Shemeska the Marauder Monsters of Faerun went disgustingly out of its way to poach from Planescape. Lets start with Abishai, then move our way up to the various types of Genasi and other planetouched. Neither of those groups, with the exception of the Fey'ri, are FR specific, yet they're included in an FR specific monster compilation. I'm sorry, Abishai are Baatezu, not specifically servitors of Tiamat. Well seeing as how Planescape is dead setting I dont have a problem with that, and I should point out that the FR isnt alone in this regard Planetouch now appear in the Core rules
Shemeska the Marauder 11-04-03, 09:38 PM	Dead? A slew of folks on the MotP and Planescape boards here would seriously disagree with you. There's just not a seperate line for the setting being printed by WotC, its not like anything in the setting no longer applies. www.planewalker.com What's there is considered canonical
Selvarin 11-04-03, 09:46 PM	Originally posted by Shemeska the Marauder Monsters of Faerun went disgustingly out of its way to poach from Planescape. Lets start with Abishai, then move our way up to the various types of Genasi and other planetouched. Neither of those groups, with the exception of the Fey'ri, are FR specific, yet they're included in an FR specific monster compilation. I'm sorry, Abishai are Baatezu, not specifically servitors of Tiamat. Well gee, considering a number of FR fans were also Planescape fans...and considering Planescape wasn't (and to the best of my knowledge still isn't) coming back, what does one do with some of the better parts of PS, hmm? Just let it sit there? The Forgotten Realms is a place that gets a fair amount of extraplanar 'action', so between that and people who liked x, y,and z from PS it isn't a big surprise really. If the writers weren't sneaking it in, how else was some of it going to be 3'ed and made available? And Faraer, thanks for pointing out the Dragothra article in Dragon #134. It has somewhat different stats than the AG module but it's that buggery dragon just the same. ENHenry, well put. It's stuff that happens and if it works in one setting why limit it to just that? Unless it's very, very setting-specific. Back in 2E there was an effort to keep a small group of critters for each, now it's thrown out the window since the situation's changed. (If anything, GH fans have a right to feel 'robbed' more in that it's used as a generic backdrop to D&D but that's another forum and another thread entirely.)
Delglath 11-04-03, 10:17 PM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert Actually, that's a lot of the reason I don't like Greyhawk: everything is just kinda there, with no real rhyme or reason. Admittedly, the planet Toril did get a lot of stuff added on -- Kara-Tur, Maztica, Al-Qadim... The Forgotten Realms is a part of Toril, not it's entirety. And at least it all fits in. Take away the fantasy elements, you've got Earth. That's why I like the Realms -- it fits together, and it's a nice twist on the known, which greatly appeals to me. *cough*cough*splutter* You have to be joking. First of all, this comment shows a complete lack of knowledge about the Greyhawk setting. Second of all, this shows you haven't really thought about this comment. Egyptian-like settings plunked down in the middle of a Renaissance-like surrounds... pre-medieval asian empires plunked down in a totally inapproprate spot that doesn't fit at all with the surrounding areas. I mean... really... if any place has no rhyme or reason, it's the majority of FR with it's hacked up, non-sensical placement of cultures and a nations. I suggest you look a bit deeper into Greyhawk before saying things have no rhyme or reason. There is a very well established rhyme and it's written with a lot of reasoning.
Delglath 11-04-03, 10:36 PM	Originally posted by Gadodel FR will be taking this route too. They started with Azoun, my fav character...but two shall fall that will make folks respect FR even more. Elminster and Drizz't, please let it be Eliminster and Drizz't :D Originally posted by Tempus665 Well, for one, it robs the FR of its uniqueness. :( Lololololololololol. FR unique? ROFL! Originally posted by ENHenry To assume the concept of an undead dragon was solely Ed's is incorrect, but to also assume that there isn't cross-pollination going on between different designers and game products all the time would be equally incorrect. There is no more cross-pollination in Greyhawk. Everything is stolen from it. How can you pollinate what is no longer published? Originally posted by Dargoth Monsters of Faerun was the biggest THEFT where a book full of Monsters related to Forgotten Realms had to be published with out the FR logo because the bean counters wanted the GH nuts to buy it to. Yeah, it was a big theft alright, but hardly from FR. Most of the monsters were either originally GH or generic MM monsters that were forcibly given FR heritages. I have the distinct feeling, Dargoth, that you started playing D&D in 3e or have only ever delved into FR material, since your stance is one of ignorance rather than enlightenment and understanding. Like has been said before, everybody steals from everybody. But at the end of the day, the biggest 'theif' of all the settings, is FR.
Wooly Rupert 11-04-03, 11:05 PM	Originally posted by Delglath *cough*cough*splutter* You have to be joking. First of all, this comment shows a complete lack of knowledge about the Greyhawk setting. Second of all, this shows you haven't really thought about this comment. Egyptian-like settings plunked down in the middle of a Renaissance-like surrounds... pre-medieval asian empires plunked down in a totally inapproprate spot that doesn't fit at all with the surrounding areas. I mean... really... if any place has no rhyme or reason, it's the majority of FR with it's hacked up, non-sensical placement of cultures and a nations. I suggest you look a bit deeper into Greyhawk before saying things have no rhyme or reason. There is a very well established rhyme and it's written with a lot of reasoning. Excuse me? If by "Egyptian-like settings plunked down in the middle of a Renaissance-like surrounds" you are speaking of Mulhorand and the Old Empires, you are mistaken. They are situated well south of the Heartlands, in an area not terribly dissimilar from Egypt. That's hardly in the middle of everything. "pre-medieval asian empires plunked down in a totally inapproprate spot that doesn't fit at all with the surrounding areas." Huh? Let's see, the Kara-Tur area is in the Far East, a huge distance away from the Heartlands and situated beyond the Hordelands. The real world counterpart is the Orient, which is situated a huge distance away from Europe, in the Far East, beyond an area previously inhabited by Mongols. So just how is that inappropriate? The Realms is an analog of Earth, done fantasy-style. Not everything is replicated, but much is, and it's replicated in about the same area in a similar fashion to how it existed in reality. It's only hacked up and non-sensical if you think the real world is. As for Greyhawk, I have no desire to delve into the setting any further than I already have. I read the novels and some of the 1st edition materials. What I saw then failed to interest me, and as time has passed, it's continued to fail to grab my attention. 'Tis pretty obvious to me that you and I are not going to agree on this issue. So, let's just let it lie, shall we?
Delglath 11-05-03, 02:36 AM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert They are situated well south of the Heartlands, in an area not terribly dissimilar from Egypt. That's hardly in the middle of everything. What you and I call 'well south' is obviously different. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert "pre-medieval asian empires plunked down in a totally inapproprate spot that doesn't fit at all with the surrounding areas." Huh? Let's see, the Kara-Tur area is in the Far East, a huge distance away from the Heartlands and situated beyond the Hordelands. The real world counterpart is the Orient, which is situated a huge distance away from Europe, in the Far East, beyond an area previously inhabited by Mongols. So just how is that inappropriate? Kara-tur was originally intended for Oerth. It was built for Oerth. It was only at the last minute that it was plunked down in FR at the whim of management, 'cause they felt it'd sell better if it was an FR accessory, rather than a GH one. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert The Realms is an analog of Earth, done fantasy-style. Not everything is replicated, but much is, and it's replicated in about the same area in a similar fashion to how it existed in reality. It's only hacked up and non-sensical if you think the real world is. Oh, now you're just being delusional. I bought the FR Grey boxed set when it first came out as well as the FR 'Adventures' hardcover and have access to the current maps of the FRCS... it in NO WAY resembles earth, or even remotely resembles the placement of real world nations, or the dynamics between the two. You should read some history on Mulhorand and how it came to be... foriegn interloper gods ring any bells? Where are the russians? Originally posted by Wooly Rupert As for Greyhawk, I have no desire to delve into the setting any further than I already have. I read the novels and some of the 1st edition materials. What I saw then failed to interest me, and as time has passed, it's continued to fail to grab my attention. Eh, only a small portion of the Greyhawk faithful consider the so called Greyhawk novels to be canon. Unlike FR, GH is not dictated to by a slew of badly written novels, designed with little more intent than to suck you dry of your money. It's little better than romance novels and is considered pulp fiction. Regardless, I care very little if you're interested in Greyhawk or not. My comments were in regards to the silliness and ill-thought out and conceived placement of nations and cultures on Toril. Don't for a second fool yourself into believing any serious thought went into it; they were nothing more than vehicles for marketing the latest and greatest supplement or boxed set. And the trend continues to this day... Originally posted by Wooly Rupert 'Tis pretty obvious to me that you and I are not going to agree on this issue. So, let's just let it lie, shall we? Now that I've gotten the last word in, sure, I'll drop it :D
Cunning Linguist 11-05-03, 06:00 AM	Now now.. lets not fight. GH is a great place if you want to make your own town, and forts and problems. Just like the core books says. Making an adventure in GH is real easy, since history vise, its a no go. It has few evil and good organizations, so one can make those up as you go along. In FR we have to put together a plot that other FR fans would like. If one of your players know the FR setting, you can't just suddenly place "the most evil know organization on the face of Faerun "The Darkmen"" into an adventure. If you are like me, you look at the local area, try to find some history on it, mix it together with the gangs who control the area. Perhaps get it together with something that happened there a long time ago. Then see if it fits with what the local gang would do, are they that kind of evil? If not, who is? Do they have a outpost here? Perhaps they are trying to place one here, but from where? (and so on and so forth) FR is much work, but it pays of.. (and the work is fun) GH is easy to use, for players who like to build there own thing.
Garen Thal 11-05-03, 06:51 AM	A few generic comments, to avoid getting too deeply involved in a discussion where hyperbole has run amock: -Prior to 3E, all things D&D were co-opted into FR, whether it fit or not. The magic shoehorn policy was in full effect back then, which meant that every class kit, spell, monster, planar anomoly and setting realignment was forced onto the Forgotten Realms (see also: Spelljammer and Planescape). Often, this meant placing things in a Forgotten Realms context to make things fit a little (X monster can be found in Y location, or among the followers of Z deity), but this was little more than an attempt to salvage FR from what was essentially imposed inclusion. -FR is a D&D setting, and just because a monster makes its first appearance in the Realms does not make it property of the Realms. That may be where the best fit is, but there's no reason to restrict these monsters to FR. -As regards Monster Compendium: Monsters of Faerûn: the reason it didn't have the FR logo was that the 3rd Edition FR logo wasn't decided upon yet, nor was the trade dress for the new line. The book preceded FRCS by four months, at which point they'd already abandoned the 2E trade dress which appeared toward the end of the earlier edition; the only 3E products wich carried that style were the Pool of Radiance: Attack on Myth Drannor and Into the Dragon's Lair adventures. MoF was supposed to carry the new trade dress, but it wasn't completed in time, so they slapped part of the cover image onto what was essentially a stripped down Monster Manual cover, and moved on with life.
Delglath 11-05-03, 09:21 AM	Originally posted by Cunning Linguist Now now.. lets not fight. I'm not fighting... yet. Originally posted by Cunning Linguist GH is a great place if you want to make your own town, and forts and problems. Just like the core books says. Making an adventure in GH is real easy, since history vise, its a no go. It has few evil and good organizations, so one can make those up as you go along. See, now, again, this indicates a distinct lack of knowledge about the setting. Is there a lot of room to create your own thing in GH whilst still sticking to canon? Yes. Does it have a rich, detailed, exciting history replete with engaging characters and lots of adventure possibilities? Hell yeah. Does it have loads of organizations, good, evil and in-between? Like... umm... sure, if you can count them that is, there are so many... I'm not sure what 'history vise' means or if it's a spelling error and if so, what the actual word is or what you mean by it, so for now, I'll let you slide on that one. But again, what I find so interesting about the perceptions of Greyhawk is that that they are so similar among people who actually and in truth know very little about the setting. These perceptions are spread by them and somehow people believe them and spread them further without investigating for themselves. I call it the 'human condition'. We're all lazy, hypocritical ass-wipes. Just some of us embrace this and others delude themselves into thinking otherwise :D Anyway, my point is, is that Greyhawk is not the bland world that everyone seems to think it is. Do a little research and you'll find that it is a very dynamic and involving setting with a lot of resources and a lot of potential. Which is why whenever I see someone say otherwise, I know for certain they haven't read more than a few pages here and there, if that, on Greyhawk. Originally posted by Cunning Linguist In FR we have to put together a plot that other FR fans would like. If one of your players know the FR setting, you can't just suddenly place "the most evil know organization on the face of Faerun "The Darkmen"" into an adventure. If you are like me, you look at the local area, try to find some history on it, mix it together with the gangs who control the area. Perhaps get it together with something that happened there a long time ago. Then see if it fits with what the local gang would do, are they that kind of evil? If not, who is? Do they have a outpost here? Perhaps they are trying to place one here, but from where? (and so on and so forth) Eh, this has nothing to do with the style of the world and everything to do with the style of DM'ing. GH has just as much, if not more, setting specific material that a DM can possibly contradict if they're not careful. You can't just plonk down any old organization anywhere in GH if you're sticking to the canon materials. A temple to Wee Jas, for instance, in Perrenland, is bordering on ridiculous, considering the dominant culture there is mixed oeridien and flan, with strong flannish roots and a smattering of Baklunish influences from over the mountains, and Wee Jas is a suel goddess and there isn't even a HINT of suel influence in any of the surrounding area. And this is not to mention a distinct hatred of female magic-users, since the area was dominated by an evil witch for quite some time. But having said that, if you're the DM and you want to plonk such an organization down, then... well... you're the DM and you can *******well do whatever the Hell you like with YOUR campaign. Originally posted by Cunning Linguist FR is much work, but it pays of.. (and the work is fun) GH is easy to use, for players who like to build there own thing. I would agree that Greyhawk does not have every single inch of it's territory mapped out with distinct and thoroughly detailed write-ups, like FR has. However, at the same time, it still has a very rich and coherent background to draw on which is dynamic and vibrant. This is why I like GH. It gives me a lot to work with, without dictating to me every little detail. So if you don't want to do any work, FR is the go. But if you want to draw upon a decent background whilst still maintaining relative creative freedom, then GH is your world.
Wooly Rupert 11-05-03, 09:54 AM	Originally posted by Delglath What you and I call 'well south' is obviously different. Kara-tur was originally intended for Oerth. It was built for Oerth. It was only at the last minute that it was plunked down in FR at the whim of management, 'cause they felt it'd sell better if it was an FR accessory, rather than a GH one. Oh, now you're just being delusional. I bought the FR Grey boxed set when it first came out as well as the FR 'Adventures' hardcover and have access to the current maps of the FRCS... it in NO WAY resembles earth, or even remotely resembles the placement of real world nations, or the dynamics between the two. You should read some history on Mulhorand and how it came to be... foriegn interloper gods ring any bells? Where are the russians? Eh, only a small portion of the Greyhawk faithful consider the so called Greyhawk novels to be canon. Unlike FR, GH is not dictated to by a slew of badly written novels, designed with little more intent than to suck you dry of your money. It's little better than romance novels and is considered pulp fiction. Regardless, I care very little if you're interested in Greyhawk or not. My comments were in regards to the silliness and ill-thought out and conceived placement of nations and cultures on Toril. Don't for a second fool yourself into believing any serious thought went into it; they were nothing more than vehicles for marketing the latest and greatest supplement or boxed set. And the trend continues to this day... Now that I've gotten the last word in, sure, I'll drop it :D Okay, let's see you back up the Kara-Tur statement. I want proof of that which you say. The physical placement of nations was not what I was talking about, though there are some similarities. I was talking about the political and cultural placements. And actually, let's see: The British Isles are north and west of Europe... The Moonshaes are north and west of a lot of the Heartlands. The nations of the Heartlands are a rough conglomerate of Europe... The Kara-Tur and Hordelands are in the same relative places... And yes, I'm familiar with the history of Mulhorand. What's wrong with having interloper gods? I have no problem with that. You have a fantasy setting, sure, things are going to be different. Badly written novels? A lot of the Realms novels are quite good. Sure, there's some forgettable ones, but those are the minority. And let's consider yet another thing: A lot had been written about the Realms long before TSR ever took a look at it! Sure, a lot of stuff may have been added later for marketing reasons, but all the new nations and such were added in places well away from everything else. Oh, and very mature to drop it after getting the last word. How old are you? 12? If you don't like the Realms, that's fine. Quit hanging out in a Realms forum looking for flames. That's not terribly mature, either.
Delglath 11-05-03, 11:13 AM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert And yes, I'm familiar with the history of Mulhorand. What's wrong with having interloper gods? I have no problem with that. You have a fantasy setting, sure, things are going to be different. My point was that it's quite literally god in the machine. The placement of Mulhorand wasn't logical and thus needed a rationalization, hence the introduction of interloper gods to establish a realm where one (like it) wouldn't normally have existed. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert Badly written novels? A lot of the Realms novels are quite good. Sure, there's some forgettable ones, but those are the minority. Oh dear... you don't *really* think that, do you? The novels are predominantly terrible. Like I said, they're considered pulp fiction by the literati, and I tend to agree. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert And let's consider yet another thing: A lot had been written about the Realms long before TSR ever took a look at it! Sure, a lot of stuff may have been added later for marketing reasons, but all the new nations and such were added in places well away from everything else. At least you concede that the evolution of the setting was primarily influenced by market factors and not creative ingenuity. Once, FR might've been an OK world, but it lost whatever soul it had once it became TSR/WotC's cash-cow. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert Oh, and very mature to drop it after getting the last word. How old are you? 12? And this isn't you trying to get in a last word? Sheesh, hello Pot. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert If you don't like the Realms, that's fine. Quit hanging out in a Realms forum looking for flames. That's not terribly mature, either. Heh, good point. I only came over because I saw in someones profile that there was a ridiculous claim being made that FR was somehow robbed of original content. I found it laughable so I had to read the poor, deluded, saps message (hya Dargoth, I'm still waiting for news of that trade...) :D Only reason I stayed was because I saw GH being dissed. I like to set matters straight in such instances :)
Robot Ron 11-05-03, 11:44 AM	This thread makes me want to abandon it all and play a 2nd Ed. homebrew game. Of course, I've wanted to play a 2nd Ed. homebrew game for a long time, but nobody wants to play with me :tantrum:
Wooly Rupert 11-05-03, 11:44 AM	Originally posted by Delglath Oh dear... you don't *really* think that, do you? The novels are predominantly terrible. Like I said, they're considered pulp fiction by the literati, and I tend to agree. Yes, I do believe that. And since when do the literati care about things like fantasy novels? The books being terrible is *your* opinion. You might as well drop that point, because you and I will not see eye to eye and thus arguing about it is pointless. Originally posted by Delglath At least you concede that the evolution of the setting was primarily influenced by market factors and not creative ingenuity. Once, FR might've been an OK world, but it lost whatever soul it had once it became TSR/WotC's cash-cow. Yeah, silly them, making money by keeping a world vibrant and active. If they never did anything to it, it would lose support and die off. Of course they're gonna push it! And I never agreed that it was primarily influenced by marketing factors. I simply agreed that marketing was a factor -- as it is in any setting TSR/WotC has pushed. Don't twist my words, thank you very much. The Realms never lost its soul, as you say. Again, we have a matter of opinion. Originally posted by Delglath And this isn't you trying to get in a last word? Sheesh, hello Pot. I never said I was trying to get the last word, and I never said that I was dropping it. I deliberately didn't do that, so that I could make a rebuttal without going against my earlier words. I wanted to leave myself an opening in case you didn't drop it. You are the one who said you were going to drop it, not I. I asked you to let it lie, because I didn't really want to engage in a pointless debate, as all debates of opinions are. Had you not made that "I get the last word!" comment, I would have let it go. Originally posted by Delglath Heh, good point. I only came over because I saw in someones profile that there was a ridiculous claim being made that FR was somehow robbed of original content. I found it laughable so I had to read the poor, deluded, saps message (hya Dargoth, I'm still waiting for news of that trade...) :D Way to insult people instead of inviting a reasonable discussion! Go you! Originally posted by Delglath Only reason I stayed was because I saw GH being dissed. I like to set matters straight in such instances :) If we are Realms junkies, then nothing you say will convince us that Greyhawk is better. Likewise, nothing I or anyone else says will convince you that the Realms is better. Different strokes, and all that. So quit looking for flames by dissing a setting we like. If you want to have a reasonable discussion, with facts and non-insulting dialogue, then that's all good. Coming into here to insult people because they don't agree with you is not. By the way, I'm still waiting for you to back up your assertation that Kara-Tur was intended for Greyhawk. If you have proof of that statement, I should really like to see it.
Shemeska the Marauder 11-05-03, 12:02 PM	Originally posted by Delglath Oh dear... you don't *really* think that, do you? The novels are predominantly terrible. Like I said, they're considered pulp fiction by the literati, and I tend to agree. Just to comment briefly on that idea there... The so called literati can blow me. Those type of people are the writing world's equivalent of stuck up, so called intellectuals in the art community who make a distinction between high art and low art, a distinction between 'real ART' and 'illustration. That really really gets under my skin. From their perspective, all too often, writing can't be entertaining to have value, nor can art be produced for any mass audience and still have value as real art. The same folks who go nuts when Steven King was given a national literally award because he writes mass market books and has been very successful at it, and writes horror and fantasy literature. In their eyes, thats not 'real' literature. *rolls eyes* The same folks who ignore people with artistic talent that falls outside of their neat little catagorization of what constitutes high art, such as at least one friend of mine going to school at the Savanna School of Art and Design (I may have the name wrong), who faced criticism in the extreme because they had fantasy material in their portfolio. Because thats not 'real art' thats illustration. *rolls eyes some more* These are the folks that have tended to make fine arts degrees and a large chunk of liberal arts degrees not worth the paper their printed on because they fall into believing their own propaganda to cover up their own insecurities and that they've made literally no contribution to society. It does a disservice to people going for such degrees in my opinion because it does certainly color many folks ideas about those degrees and fields of study. (I've got a number of hard science degrees, so this aint my area at all for what it matters) To quote a radio beer commercial: "What does someone with a masters degree in art history do? They pour coffee!"
Yamo 11-05-03, 12:20 PM	Geez. It's pretty much impossible to steal from the FR setting. Even people with a certain fondness for it (like me) can freely admit the truth: That it's at least 80% whole-cloth stolen from World of Greyhawk. Enjoy it regardless if you want, but not copping to that is just dishonest.
Faraer 11-05-03, 01:39 PM	Yamo, why do you post these self-evidently false claims? Ed created the Realms 10+ years before the World of Greyhawk folio was published. And let's stop using 'pulp fiction' as if it was derogatory. And only the bits stuck onto the Realms by TSR are an analogue of Earth. And the Realms and the World of Greyhawk are both great.
Yamo 11-05-03, 02:42 PM	Yamo, why do you post these self-evidently false claims? Ed created the Realms 10+ years before the World of Greyhawk folio was published. Oh, and I suppose he created drow, beholders, illithids, the D&D magic system, spellcasting clerics, the elemental planes, the megadungeon next to the continent's biggest metropolis run by a mad archmage (Castle Greyhawk) and so on and so forth? Hardly. FR is a small kernal of originality (the 20% or so that predated D&D and Greyhawk), padded endlessly with reams and reams of magic, creatures and miscellaneous setting tropes from Gygax's world. Greenwood didn't even create his own pantheons for the most part (witness the host of directly-transposed Babylonian, Egyptian, Finnish, Norse and Celtic dieties). Oh, and all the demihuman pantheons lifted directly from...Greyhawk, of course. Yup. Terribly original. Greenwood is not a creator, but an imitator with flair. Whether you like FR or not, it's the stone cold, factual truth.
Another Gnome 11-05-03, 03:21 PM	I agree that Realms is for a great part (but I strongly suggest avoiding the use of the word "most" when "most" of every single piece of fantastic literature, ranging from Hindu mythology to Star Wars, has been "originally" presented somewhere else first) inspired or even copied word to word from other sources, but who bleeding cares? It doesn't matter if names like Aglarond or Vaasa are originally from Lord of the Rings or Finnish west coast, respectively, as long as those places in their "new home" have at least something to make them appear different from every other place on the map. Why should we give a damn here about what Greyhawk people think has been "stolen" from "their" setting, or vice versa? FR even has a major advantage over other settings in that we can say we've taken parts from every other imaginable world as we've pleased, we're damn proud of it, and we can even kick elements from other worlds to hell away from ours when they become useless to us! Be proud to be part of the biggest, baddest setting ever published, that puts even Planescape to shame by claiming independence from it - that at least is something you don't see Greyhawk being able to do anytime soon! Hah! [ :D ]
Herr Doktor 11-05-03, 03:24 PM	Wow... This thread really brought out some ridiculous fanatical trolls! I really like the fact that GH devotees are starting to show up to speak against Dargoth and a few of the other more close-minded posters only to act entirely close-minded and ridiculous themselves. You like what setting you like. Knock it off with your raging superiority complex and think before you speak. ::Blasts the trolls with a well aimed Meteor Swarm:: Each and every D&D setting borrowed from what came before it... Real world Myth and Legend probably being the common starting ground. Stealing implies that it can no longer be used with the setting it originated in... Poor choice of words.
Yamo 11-05-03, 03:40 PM	I agree that Realms is for a great part (but I strongly suggest avoiding the use of the word "most" when "most" of every single piece of fantastic literature, ranging from Hindu mythology to Star Wars, has been "originally" presented somewhere else first) inspired or even copied word to word from other sources, but who bleeding cares? Nobody cares, really. I don't, at least. I can enjoy FR just fine. I just get a little irked when people can't admit what you can about it and defend it as original in ways that it's not. Stealing implies that it can no longer be used with the setting it originated in... Poor choice of words. "Copied" works better than "stolen", that much is true.
Faraer 11-05-03, 04:04 PM	The Realms is part of the tradition of swords & sorcery, not a creation out of whole cloth. Gary didn't 'steal' or 'copy' the elements he used in the WoG, he partook of the cauldron of story. Same with Ed. In both cases, the sources are mostly ones that few in this thread have probably read. If Yamo doesn't see the visionary uniqueness of the Realms, that's his problem. I'm not quick to call troll, but after showing how little he understands the Realms with his thoroughly debunked claim that it lacks political complexity, it's pointless to just assert a specific (and impossible) percentage is drawn from the World of Greyhawk and that this is 'stone cold, factual truth'.
Another Gnome 11-05-03, 04:11 PM	I just get a little irked when people can't admit what you can about it and defend it as original in ways that it's not. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. When being accused of being all copied from other worlds, all that there is original in the Realms tends to get forgotten or simply dismissed whether there's truth behind it or not. So one might as well be proud of playing in a non-original setting. For the sake of discussion, though, FR as a setting is not a copy of anything else even if and when individual things are found elsewhere - adding apples to oranges makes a fruit bowl, not more apples or oranges. ;)
Faraer 11-05-03, 04:22 PM	The important point is that those fruit become something new in the creator's (or curator's) hands. What's valuable about these worlds is in these nuances, not in the existence of totally unparallelled monster A or original setting gimmick B. (Unfortunately, settings that truly are patently unlike anything else aren't very commercial -- Jorune, Tekumel. And certain sources of those worlds can be tracked -- a process that is ultimately just a curiosity -- as easily as any other setting.)
Argon 11-05-03, 04:25 PM	Sorry to point out to you many ignorant FR fans. But were in the world did the Drow, Duegar, Derro, Orcus, Demogorgan, Tiamat, Cooshee, Mist Wolf, Shadow Dragon and just about a third of the spells originate from? I'll tell you Greyhawk! If it wasn't for the Realms constent raping of the Greyhawk setting at least half of what you FR fans like would not exist. One of the reasons I don't like the FR setting is that it lack's original Ideas and was made almost entirely by stealing from other settings. Yes It's true GH is not the only setting FR has stolen from. Dark Sun, Dragon Lance, Greyhawk, all have a certain unique tweak to their settings. Forgotten Realms just took ideas from everyone and place it into their setting. It's really sad that maybe 20% of what you call Toril is actually original to the setting. While 80% or more has actually been taken from other settings. So if you like playing in a game setting that takes the majority of it's ideas from everyone else. Then go ahead and play it. But never ever complain about an idea being stolen from your setting because that's how your setting was created. I think of FR as the Plagiarizing campaign! Nuff said !
Another Gnome 11-05-03, 05:29 PM	Sorry to point out to you many ignorant FR fans. There's a difference between fan and fanatic. There's also a difference between information and insult. Forgotten Realms just took ideas from everyone and place it into their setting. Plenty of those ideas were also adapted and evolved, making Realms unique in that respect. There's nothing wrong with a copy that does something better than the original.
Cunning Linguist 11-05-03, 05:29 PM	20% of FR is 5x the amount of info any other setting has. If only 5% was "pure" original, it would still be more original then GH has in its whole setting. FR has over 150 game products, (and that's not counting any "core" books) and god knows how many novels. If FR had stolen 80% of it, GH had to be the size of Thay, and the whole planescape setting would fit inside Waterdeep. FR might have stolen the whole Waterdeep/undermount. thing, but its damn well more detailed and perfected in FR then it would ever have been in GH. Same goes for basically everything FR "takes" from other places. As for: "1/4 of the spells are stolen from GH", no they are from the PHB. And I for one would like it more if they had the name of Arcanists instead of the normal PHB name.
Robot Ron 11-05-03, 05:31 PM	What FR lacks in originality, it more than makes up for in execution, which I believe Greyhawk lacks. As far as 3rd Edition goes, FR is my favorite, although I haven't taken a look at the new Dragonlance book yet.
Lashan 11-05-03, 05:49 PM	Personally, I think that there are aspects of FR that were handled better and then some aspects of GH that were handled better, as well. I think they are both good systems and each has some weakness to it. I think Greyhawk handled the entire variety of human cultures much better and go into great detail about migration patterns and even different pantheons for the various human culutres. I know that FR has done this, too, but not to the same quality of work that GH has done. I feel that there are a lot of details left out of Greyhawk that make life a little bit tougher on a DM. Personally, I love the Volo's Guide series of FR. Why? Because it adds in flavor that isn't always plot important. It's fluff. It simply adds flavor and saves the DM a lot of work of creating a lot of towns, stores, inns, and various NPC's. Now, I don't mean major NPCs or major organizations, but simple the small filler space in the FR. I may know a lot about the Gran March (major exports, churches, politcal alliances), but I don't know much at all about what Hookhill or Shiboleth is really like. Sure, I can make anything up that I want to, but I have a life and I devote a lot of time to make my modules stellar. I don't want to spend a lot of extra time trying to determine what the base city is like. Besides, if there is an aspect of FR that I don't like, I ignore it and create the game world like I want. These are just my 2 copper...
Brom Blackforge 11-05-03, 05:52 PM	I feel compelled to point out that it is possible to champion one's setting of choice without bashing other settings. That seems to be a fact that has sadly eluded people on both sides. I prefer Greyhawk, and yes it peeves me that there's a ton of new FR material and practically no new GH. That's not a knock on FR. Sure, lots of elements of the game originated in Greyhawk, but that has to do with the fact that Greyhawk was the main setting during the game's formative years. (Any Blackmoor fans out there care to differ?) Now, like it or not, GH has been put on the back-burner (or taken off the stove, depending on who you ask), and the bulk of the creative activity is in FR. So of course things are going to be taken out of FR to be used in the game at large. Things have also been borrowed from other settings (e.g., Planescape). I can only guess that there was a conscious decision made to preserve kender as unique to Dragonlance, or else they'd probably be in the Player's Handbook by now - or at least the Monster Manual. Greyhawk is a great setting, but that's just my opinion. Some of the derogatory comments I've seen applied here to Greyhawk I've also seen elsewhere applied to the Forgotten Realms. I think to some extent, some of the more militant fans (or fanatics, if you prefer) are so entrenched in their position, they're not willing to give the other setting a chance. Their loss.
Kuje31 11-05-03, 05:59 PM	I would like to point out, the drow were stolen from earth. Read some Norse myths, what do we have, ah look dark elves that live in the ground, who are called dark alfar.... wow who would have thought. So this really is a bit of a dumb arguement. Gary, Ed, and 1/2 to 3/4th of the material in d&d is material frrom earth legends and myths...... So who stole what and from who is a bit one sided. Let's not even get into the planes, as much as I like planescape, half to almost all the planes are ripped right from our legends and myths.
Yamo 11-05-03, 06:16 PM	"I would like to point out, the drow were stolen from earth. Read some Norse myths, what do we have, ah look dark elves that live in the ground, who are called dark alfar.... wow who would have thought." And their matriarchial society venerated Lolth, too, right? Wow, that is crazy. :rolleyes: There's a difference between taking inspiration and just taking.
Kuje31 11-05-03, 06:22 PM	Originally posted by Yamo "I would like to point out, the drow were stolen from earth. Read some Norse myths, what do we have, ah look dark elves that live in the ground, who are called dark alfar.... wow who would have thought." And their matriarchial society venerated Lolth, too, right? Wow, that is crazy. :rolleyes: Good gods, that's a great way to MISS THE POINT. Without Norse myths, do you really think there might even be dark elves? Please no wonder the others in this thread compained you missed the point entirely. Demogorgon, is from earth, as is Tiamet, so are Duegar, etc. There's a difference? Really. Again let's see, hmmm what has been stolen from greek myths, we got centuars, we got merman, we got nymphs, we have half the d&d planes, the other half are from norse and celtic myths. Again 1/2 to 3/4th of all d&d material is stolen from earth. So there really isn't much of a arguement greyhawk and realms fans have about "whaa whaa, he stole from me, boo hoo."
Yamo 11-05-03, 06:31 PM	Good gods, that's a great way to MISS THE POINT. The point is that Greenwood didn't even TRY to put a unique spin on the idea, and just stole Gygax's. Gygax took inspiration from the myth of subterranean dark elves and did something fairly unique with the concept, resulting in the matriarchal, slave, spider and poison-happy Lolth-worshipping drow. Greenwood didn't use Gygax's drow for inspiration, he just shamelessly copied the same, exact creation without even a pretense of originality. Repeat that process a few hundred more times, and you have at least 4/5ths of the Forgotten Realms setting in place. FR is not about taking inspiration from archetypal fantastic and mythological concepts, it's about skipping the annoying work inherent in that and directly copying the inspired work of others instead.
Kuje31 11-05-03, 06:36 PM	Originally posted by Yamo The point is that Greenwood didn't even TRY to put a unique spin on the idea, and just stole Gygax's. Gygax took inspiration from the myth of subterranean dark elves and did something fairly unique with the concept, resulting in the matriarchal, slave, spider and and poison-happy Lolth-worshipping drow. Greenwood didn't use Gygax's drow for inspiration, he just shamelessly copied the same, exact creation without even a pretense of originality. Repeat that process a few hundred more times, and you have at least 4/5ths of the Forgotten Realms setting in place. Again, great way to miss the point. Gary stole the dark elves from the same source Ed did..... Again Norse myths, since Ed works in a library he has a ton of material from myth's and legends. Get over your self, greyhawk is as much of a rip off as FR is. So just let it GO! And you have the same 4/5th's of our legends, and that is the setting that is greyhawk. Woopie..... booo hooo, face it. Gary stole from our legends, and you are now claiming it's "original" work. Please. Half to three fourth of the material in Greyhawk is ripped right out of earth's legends. Why do I seem to be repeating this, and it seems it's not getting understood? And I am not argueing for or against Greyhawk or FR. The truth is neither setting is "original" work.
Yamo 11-05-03, 06:40 PM	Agian, great way to miss the point. Gary stole the dark elves from the same source Ed did..... No, I'm afraid it's you that doesn't understand: The issue is that Greenwood stole Gygax's EXACT and VERY SPECIFIC variation on the dark elf legend. The concept of romance novels based on forbidden love isn't original, either, but if one author of such a novel stole ENTIRE CHAPTERS WORD FOR FREAKIN' WORD from another such author, he'd still be guilty of shameful plagiarism. So again: There is a profound practical and moral difference between taking inspiration and just plain taking.
Kuje31 11-05-03, 06:54 PM	Originally posted by Yamo No, I'm afraid it's you that doesn't understand: The issue is that Greenwood stole Gygax's EXACT and VERY SPECIFIC variation on the dark elf legend. The concept of romance novels based on forbidden love isn't original, either, but if one author of such a novel stole ENTIRE CHAPTERS WORD FOR FREAKIN' WORD from another such author, he'd still be guilty of shameful plagiarism. So again: There is a profound practical and moral difference between taking inspiration and just plain taking. This isn't true, since Lloth in FR was a deity first and foremost and was not a demon who became a deity, who also has two other children, Eilistraee and her brother, and was Corellon's lover. So right there there is five examples why she is not ripped right from Gary. Please again get over yourself, drow in FR are not the same as they are in Greyhawk. And so you can keep claiming "Ed stole them, whaa whaa." Sure yes he did take Lolth, but she is not the same Lolth, only in name is she the same. So if we want to play that he stole her name game, then Gary stole merman, dark elves, etc. Or Gary stole hobbits, and that was why he got sued so badly by the Tolkien estate. And blame also TSR, since every world had to fit into the Great Wheel, and had to be part of the Multiverse. Ed first and foremost created FR with only human deities, and then when d&d came out yes he did take some names from D&D, just like he and gary took them from our legends.
Lashan 11-05-03, 07:17 PM	Even if Ed Greenwood took dark elves straight from Greyhawk, who cares? Does any of it really matter? This goes for FR stuff used in other game worlds. Who cares where it originally came from?
Kuje31 11-05-03, 07:33 PM	Originally posted by Lashan Even if Ed Greenwood took dark elves straight from Greyhawk, who cares? Does any of it really matter? This goes for FR stuff used in other game worlds. Who cares where it originally came from? Excatly, which is what I was trying to say, but you said it better. :)
Delglath 11-05-03, 08:04 PM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert The books being terrible is *your* opinion. You might as well drop that point, because you and I will not see eye to eye and thus arguing about it is pointless. No, they're terrible because they're terrible, not because I think they're terrible. I just happen to agree with the patently obvious. In any art, there are certain rules which define what is good and what is bad. Just because you like something that is, by these definitions, bad, doesn't make it good. A bad work can be popular, but it still doesn't make it good. The novels are like soap operas. They're formulaic and cliched. Not to say that using a formula isn't a good thing, as without a formula there would be no method of comparison to determine what is good and what is bad. However, originality and ingenuity in applying those formulas is what seperates the good from the bad. There is no ingenuity or originality in the FR pulp fiction novels. Agree or disagree; your opinion does not change the facts. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert I never said I was trying to get the last word, and I never said that I was dropping it. I deliberately didn't do that, so that I could make a rebuttal without going against my earlier words. I wanted to leave myself an opening in case you didn't drop it. You are the one who said you were going to drop it, not I. I asked you to let it lie, because I didn't really want to engage in a pointless debate, as all debates of opinions are. Had you not made that "I get the last word!" comment, I would have let it go. Oh dear, whatever are you going on about? You said, I said, we said, who said? Take a xanex and reply to me in the morning... Originally posted by Wooly Rupert If we are Realms junkies, then nothing you say will convince us that Greyhawk is better. Likewise, nothing I or anyone else says will convince you that the Realms is better. Different strokes, and all that. So quit looking for flames by dissing a setting we like. Like I said, I didn't come here to insult anyone. That's just my natural charm :D I came because I felt I had to read the content of what I felt was a ridiculous assertion in a topic title. That FR could be robbed from when it is nothing more than a conglomerate, I felt was patently absurd. Then I saw my homie (Greyhawk) being dissed, and felt the need to step in and correct y'all. Originally posted by Wooly Rupert By the way, I'm still waiting for you to back up your assertation that Kara-Tur was intended for Greyhawk. If you have proof of that statement, I should really like to see it. Heh, sorry, but whether you believe me or not, I *really* don't care. If it bothers you so much, do your own research and find out for yourself whether I'm wrong or not, because I can't be bothered doing your work for you. Originally posted by Shemeska the Marauder Just to comment briefly on that idea there... The so called literati can blow me. Those type of people are the writing world's equivalent of stuck up, so called intellectuals in the art community who make a distinction between high art and low art, a distinction between 'real ART' and 'illustration. Look, although I agree with a lot of what you say, at the end of the day, there IS a difference between good and bad art, in any category. I don't agree with a lot of what the literati call bad, but at the same time, there are rules that allow one to differentiate between good and bad. In my opinion, a lot of the time the 'powers that be' twist those rules to their own BS whims, but it doesn't change the fact that the rules exist. By those rules, the FR (and hey, let's be fair, the GH ones as well...) novels are mostly (and I will concede that because I haven't read them all, there MIGHT be some gems amongst them) trash. Originally posted by Cunning Linguist FR has over 150 game products, (and that's not counting any "core" books) and god knows how many novels. If FR had stolen 80% of it, GH had to be the size of Thay, and the whole planescape setting would fit inside Waterdeep. Again, you seem to not quite understand the breadth and depth of other settings and yet, you feel quite confident in making your assertions known. Greyhawk has almost a hundred game products (that I know of personally). FR certainly has more, roughly fifty more if your numbers are correct, however that's hardly as much as you claim. Originally posted by Brom Blackforge I think to some extent, some of the more militant fans (or fanatics, if you prefer) are so entrenched in their position, they're not willing to give the other setting a chance. Their loss. I started playing D&D in FR. I began buying D&D stuff in '88, a year after the first FR supplement came out, IIRC. It was a confusing time for a newbie D&D player as FR was where the action was, but there was all this older stuff on the shelves. I went for the newer stuff. Bought the Grey Boxed Set and Adventures and a few other things. I did get hooked on Dragonlance for awhile and still have all but three of the original DL modules. But FR was where I gamed most of the time, simply because it was the most available. But it never inspired or interested me. In fact, the setting was part of the reason why I dumped 2nd ed (a small part, admittedly, since the real reason was that 2nd ed sucked major monkey *********) and moved to GURPS and my homebrew. It wasn't until 3e re-inspired me that I picked up the LGG (Living Greyhawk Gazetteer) and discovered a truly inspiring and interesting setting (IMO). I just wanted to make it clear that I've given FR a chance. For me, it didn't cut the mustard. Originally posted by Kuje31 Get over your self, greyhawk is as much of a rip off as FR is. So just let it GO! And you have the same 4/5th's of our legends, and that is the setting that is greyhawk. Woopie..... booo hooo, face it. Gary stole from our legends, and you are now claiming it's "original" work. Please. Yes, but Greyhawk was the first to do it! :D
Kuje31 11-05-03, 08:17 PM	Originally posted by Delglath Yes, but Greyhawk was the first to do it! :D This is false, since FR was created almost ten years before D&D was a pipe dream in Gary's and the other creators thoughts.
Dargoth 11-05-03, 08:32 PM	Originally posted by Yamo Greenwood didn't even create his own pantheons for the most part (witness the host of directly-transposed Babylonian, Egyptian, Finnish, Norse and Celtic dieties). . Behold the arse that is the Greyhawk fan This is really funny I challenge you to Justify that claim go on I dare you From the orgional FR 1ed Box set tell me how many gods where taken from the real world mythology? Oghma Silvanus Loviator Mielikki Ilmater Tyr So lets see Thats 6 gods from 45 that appear in the Origional FR boxset Im guessing that Greyhawk fans cant added up because 6/45 is not MOST it is infact 13% I suggest you learn to count Oh and do you REALLY want to get into game Designers taking stuff from the real world? because if we do Greyhawk is the biggest thief of all, hell half the monsters in D&D are taken from the real world mythology. By the way if so many of you Greyhawk fans loath and hate the FR for its lack of orgionality what are you doing on this message board should you be back on the Greyhawk boards decrying the WOTC for not publishing any Greyhawk stuff? Cold hard facts FR is popular and sells Greyhawk isnt End of story
Kuje31 11-05-03, 08:43 PM	Originally posted by Dargoth Oh and do you REALLY want to get into game Designers taking stuff from the real world? because if we do Greyhawk is the biggest thief of all, hell half the monsters in D&D are taken from the real world mythology. This is all right, acording to some, since Gary didn't really "steal" them, he um "borrowed them" Yeah that's it he "borrowed them." And he then give them his own twist, so it is all right, since he didn't outright "steal" them, since they are not the original because again Gary gave them his own little twist. Except for those hobbits, er I mean halflings, when the Tolkien Estate stepped in on his "borrowering." Yes I am being deeply sarcastic if no one realizes it.
Nightdruid 11-05-03, 09:00 PM	Originally posted by Dargoth Behold the arse that is the Greyhawk fan This is really funny I challenge you to Justify that claim go on I dare you From the orgional FR 1ed Box set tell me how many gods where taken from the real world mythology? Many more than those you listed; Greenwood himself wrote an article in Dragon (pre-1e box, if I'm not mistaken) that said that most of his deities were renamed earth deities, such as Chauntea is really Demeter, Sune is Aphrodite, etc. They may currently be considered seperate entities, but their inspiration was most certainly earth-gods.
Yamo 11-05-03, 09:58 PM	So lets see Thats 6 gods from 45 that appear in the Origional FR boxset Funny that you should omit the Untheric and Mulhorandian pantheons completely, as well as all the demihuman ones.
Selvarin 11-05-03, 10:07 PM	Originally posted by Nightdruid Many more than those you listed; Greenwood himself wrote an article in Dragon (pre-1e box, if I'm not mistaken) that said that most of his deities were renamed earth deities, such as Chauntea is really Demeter, Sune is Aphrodite, etc. They may currently be considered seperate entities, but their inspiration was most certainly earth-gods. Yep, a number of deities are remakes of those from Norse, Celtic, and Finnish pantheons. And that's just for the Faerunian pantheon itself. Likewise the elemental deities are derived from those found in the Elric saga. Ilmater is a copy of 'Issek of the Jug' from the Nehwon (sp?) pantheon found in the adventures of Fafherd & the Gray Mouser. Thus they were the inspiration, although what's been done with them since has made them Realmsian in nature.
Wooly Rupert 11-05-03, 11:11 PM	Originally posted by Delglath No, they're terrible because they're terrible, not because I think they're terrible. I just happen to agree with the patently obvious. In any art, there are certain rules which define what is good and what is bad. Just because you like something that is, by these definitions, bad, doesn't make it good. A bad work can be popular, but it still doesn't make it good. The novels are like soap operas. They're formulaic and cliched. Not to say that using a formula isn't a good thing, as without a formula there would be no method of comparison to determine what is good and what is bad. However, originality and ingenuity in applying those formulas is what seperates the good from the bad. There is no ingenuity or originality in the FR pulp fiction novels. Agree or disagree; your opinion does not change the facts. Okay, you're right about *one* thing: my opinion does not change facts. Nor does yours! Give me a single fact from your statement. Not opinion, I want a cold, hard verifiable fact. Originally posted by Delglath Like I said, I didn't come here to insult anyone. That's just my natural charm :D Yeah, whatever... Does the word "troll" have any meaning to you? Originally posted by Delglath Then I saw my homie (Greyhawk) being dissed, and felt the need to step in and correct y'all. With opinions, not facts. You have yet to back up a statement you've made. Originally posted by Delglath Heh, sorry, but whether you believe me or not, I *really* don't care. If it bothers you so much, do your own research and find out for yourself whether I'm wrong or not, because I can't be bothered doing your work for you. *MY* work? You can't be bothered to back up something you said? You made the assertation, not I. If you want me to believe it, prove it. Otherwise, drop it.
ManinDarkness 11-05-03, 11:15 PM	Originally posted by Shemeska the Marauder That really really gets under my skin. From their perspective, all too often, writing can't be entertaining to have value, nor can art be produced for any mass audience and still have value as real art. Art can be entertaining, it just isn't its mission. Originally posted by Shemeska the Marauder The same folks who go nuts when Steven King was given a national literally award because he writes mass market books and has been very successful at it, and writes horror and fantasy literature. In their eyes, thats not 'real' literature. *rolls eyes* The same folks who ignore people with artistic talent that falls outside of their neat little catagorization of what constitutes high art, such as at least one friend of mine going to school at the Savanna School of Art and Design (I may have the name wrong), who faced criticism in the extreme because they had fantasy material in their portfolio. Because thats not 'real art' thats illustration. *rolls eyes some more* Pity on them. I agree with you here. Originally posted by Shemeska the Marauder These are the folks that have tended to make fine arts degrees and a large chunk of liberal arts degrees not worth the paper their printed on because they fall into believing their own propaganda to cover up their own insecurities and that they've made literally no contribution to society. Not many people make contributions to society. There are some strong reasons why most (I don't dare say all, 'cause I haven't read 'em) world-shared books are not art, and they are: trascendency, deepness, coherence and termination. FR's ( and many other's) books are lacking in theses departments. Sells don't make something art: Van Gogh hardly could sell in his life. And Van Gogh is art. World-shared books are like cookies, you like them, but they have no substance.
Argon 11-05-03, 11:35 PM	All fantasy writer's have taken earth based mythology and created something unique in their own image and words. Yes it's also true Tolkien was a major inspiration for what is now D&D as well as influence other writers. What many of you fail to realize is the following. Dark alfar is a dark fairy no were does it state that Dark alfar are Elves. Heck Tolkien take on the matter of Dark Alfar was to make them Orcs. That's right to Tolkien Orc's are twisted Elves. Secondly I have no problem with FR using gods based on ancient earth cultures, that's alright by me. But I was actually including said gods as original to the FR setting as they were not taken from another setting but from historical mythology. But not only did FR take the drow from GH it also took the names of houses specific to GH and printed them in the Menzzoberrazan Box set. Not all the houses in the box set were taken from GH , but what made it really blantant is that the same house leaders in the box set were originally the head of the same GH houses. If this isn't plagirism I don't know what is. Lolth was a creation specific to GH but since I have seen many of the Demi-human gods crossed referenced with other TSR/Wotc setting's I won't argue on this point even though their were originally based in GH. As far as I'm concerned more than 90% of all TSR/WoTC novels are crap! Their was the Choronicles from DL that was good. The first Moonshae book was also well written. Lastly The prince of Lies was also good. But The majority is absolute crap and that's being nice. So now that I'm clear using a historical reference and creating something from it is not stealing or taking, nor is it plagirism. What is plagirism is taken the word hobbits which was a sole creation of Tolkien, taking the drow, derro, cooshee, multiple artifacts such as the girdle of Ursnt (come on they didn't even bother to change the name, were is ursnt not on Toril? Oh Oh I know it's on the map of Oerth that's GH for those of you don't know). Now I guess you can defend the fact that GH specific spells were placed in the PHB so I'll let you use it. God knows you need something to hold on too. The fact is that FR is a multiple campaign setting claiming to be FR specific. FR is more popular not because it was original. But because the company that published it wanted to take all the guess work out of dming (which is not to my liking) which appeals to the majority of hack-n-slash and power gamers out there! GH has some of thse areas as well but it explains the migration movements of it's races, languages and political movements 100 times better than the FR setting. The FR setting does all your thinking for you leaving you with something that is easily run as is. While it's true you can change things in your campaign world. FR was created for those individuals either with little time or little imagination to form a world of their own. While GH was meant to appeal to the creative style of DMing their is so only your DM's imagination was a limitation (the version I like better). This is not to say that you couldn't come up with imaginative scenarios for your FR campaign. I'm just stateing that the majority of FR fans play the setting because most of the work is done for them. GH is FR's complete opposite, but take my word on it FR has stolen more of it's ideas from other settings then actually create original one's of it's own. Now I have played in the FR setting with a bunch of different groups of FR fans. But IMHO FR is the second worst setting ever published by TSR/Wotc. I hated Mystara even more tha FR. I have played DL, DS, BR, and GH. In my opinion DL took a nice spin on fantasy role playing though I didn't particularly like the dragon riders, some how they made the setting work. DS was very well written but did not appeal to my prefered style of play, this setting had a very unique feel to it. IMHO Birth Right was an attempt to make a GH styled world. While BR had many differences it seem to be in similar flavor to GH. So when I stated ignorant FR fans I meant the FR fans who believe that they have an original setting. Those FR fans who accept what they have and still like it is fine for them. But don't be so ignorant to think that FR has anything that was ever taken from it by another setting. . Hopefully this straightens everyone out!
Delglath 11-05-03, 11:45 PM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert :fight!: :twitch: :censored: :weep: :hoppingma :headexplo :tantrum: :sad: :turkey: Whilst Delglath just :rofl:
Wooly Rupert 11-05-03, 11:54 PM	Originally posted by Delglath Whilst Delglath just :rofl: Well, I guess that nicely proves that all of your points were invalid to begin with. Thank you.
Another Gnome 11-05-03, 11:56 PM	But don't be so ignorant to think that FR has anything that was ever taken from it by another setting. Read the list of sources for some of the non-FR 3E accessories. FR-originated mechanics have been used quite freely, even in the current core rules (not including the Red Wizard PrC who is clearly defined as FR-specific). I assume rules (especially the new rules) is not what you meant, though, but the point is that there's no difference between using a Realms-specific feat and a GH-specific magic item or spell. Don't make too general statements when such statements are generally inaccurate.
Herr Doktor 11-06-03, 01:41 AM	This thread should be moderated to the HELLS right about now. This thread has become a "My Setting is better than your setting" -- "Let's throw insults back and forth all day" thread. Secondly... Those of you claiming the Realms lacks original work and that the realms FLUFF that exists is something favored by power gamers and hack and slashers are a little confused. Certainly the Realms have borrowed things from hundreds of different settings, novels, mythos, et cetera... But they've all been altered one way or another to better fit the Realms persona. I'm not going to be posting to or reading this thread anymore as I don't see this as being productive at all... I'm sure all the sensible boards users will let it die down as well.
Delglath 11-06-03, 09:04 AM	Can we move this debate over to the Greyhawk forum? It's just been determined that we need all the attention we can get :smirk:
Brom Blackforge 11-06-03, 09:43 AM	Originally posted by Argon Hopefully this straightens everyone out! Good luck on that!
the_heart 11-06-03, 09:59 AM	Originally posted by Delglath Can we move this debate over to the Greyhawk forum? It's just been determined that we need all the attention we can get :smirk: ...need anymore be said!!!!:smirk:
Israfel666 11-06-03, 10:20 AM	Just a question to Argon and other GH players (whom I have seen making the same point several times): you claim that one of the advantages of GH over FR is that it allows for more freedom on the DM's side. That means, while FR is uber-detailed and every minor plot is laid out for you to build your adventure upon, GH leaves more free space to DM initiative - to quote Argon, "FR was created for those individuals either with little time or little imagination to form a world of their own. While GH was meant to appeal to the creative style of DMing their is so only your DM's imagination was a limitation." But then, what is the point of having a published Campaign Setting in a shared game world at all? If you like to homebrew, don't play GH, just make your own world. If published material is only an inspiration for you to create your own personal evil organization or new city (as opposed to FR where every square inch of the game world has been covered), why should you feel attached to a particular setting?
Delglath 11-06-03, 01:01 PM	Originally posted by Israfel666 But then, what is the point of having a published Campaign Setting in a shared game world at all? If you like to homebrew, don't play GH, just make your own world. If published material is only an inspiration for you to create your own personal evil organization or new city (as opposed to FR where every square inch of the game world has been covered), why should you feel attached to a particular setting? Somewhat of an answer... (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=1769214#post1769214)
ENHenry 11-06-03, 01:52 PM	Absolutely fascinating. Rampant idea-borrowing happens between all settings, and what are we still arguing about? How one setting gets "ripped off" more than any other. :rolleyes: There are so many informational errors no one could possibly cover them all - but the biggest is how underappreciated this or that setting is - it's just as appreciated as the market will allow it to be. Man, I can't wait to hear the wailing and Gnashing of Teeth when Eberron is released. "They stole Dinosaurs from the Realms!" "They stole Constructs that can be PC's from Spelljammer!" "They stole this from Greyhawk!" "They stole THAT from Planescape!" Yeesh. You'd think it was Indian Reservation land, the seriousness some people are putting into it. A few points: Italy and Eqypt are closer than Sembia and Mulhorand are. Lolth is known as Lloth in Greyhawk, if I recall correctly, and the FR version is EXACTLY like the Greyhawk version, as is her handmaidens, drow minions, and dunerground cities - read modules D1-D2 and Q1 for reiteration of this. Ed Greenwood didn't steal Gary's Dark Elves - TSR did. Kara-Tur was indeed to be part of Greyhawk, as early as the original 1985 Oriental Adventures book. It's in there, as Prego Sauce would say. Even Tyr and Ilmater are Interloper deities - Torm was just a spunky mortal who served Tyr, wasn't he? and finally, Selvarin gets my applause for reiterating a Newhon reference that I've been espousing for months on this forum! :bow: Peace unto all, and to all, a good night...
Israfel666 11-06-03, 02:40 PM	Originally posted by ENHenry Lolth is known as Lloth in Greyhawk, if I recall correctly It was known as Lloth in Faerûn too, as proved by early Drizzt books (Homeland, aah... great novel!!). At some time (I think when they switched to 2nd ed), someone at WotC chose to change the spelling. I don't know why, but I'm grateful for it... Englishmen (especially Welsh, I've heard) may be used to pronouncing names like Lloyd, but to us strangers it's an alien sound.
jinat 11-06-03, 03:24 PM	Originally posted by Mirtek Why do you think the sequel to the Moonshae Trilogy wasn't written for the FR? The Moonshae Trilogy were the first FR novels ever, and the novel where this dracolich (created by Talos, long before Sammaster) appeared was Prophet of Moonshae, the first novel of the Druidhome Trilogy which was the sequel to the Moonshae Trilogy The Moonshae trilogy was indeed initialy written as Dragonlance series but was tweaked later to fit FR. I always did think that the whole Cult of the Dragon thing suited DL more, however it is my knowledge that the Dracolich first appeared in Spellfire.
Wooly Rupert 11-06-03, 05:53 PM	Originally posted by ENHenry Kara-Tur was indeed to be part of Greyhawk, as early as the original 1985 Oriental Adventures book. It's in there, as Prego Sauce would say. Okay, now I'm not trying to argue. I just want to know where that bit of information comes from. I just flipped thru my copy of Oriental Adventures and saw no references to any specific lands beyond Kara-Tur. There was no mention of Oerth, Greyhawk, Toril, or the Realms. So I flipped thru my copy of Greyhawk Adventures. Though there was a brief section on Oriental characters, I saw no mention of Kara-Tur, specifically. I similarly saw no such references in the OA modules that I have, at least the early ones. I'm missing the first two, but the second two do not mention being a part of any other campaign world. (I believe the fifth one was when Kara-Tur became part of the Realms) So please, tell me where that info comes from. I honestly want to know this.
FineasBoggs 11-06-03, 05:56 PM	I didn't skim the four pages for any references to the Red Wizard of Thay being ripped from FR into the 3.5 DMG. Just more fodder for the debate.
Another Gnome 11-06-03, 06:38 PM	The Red Wizard is clearly given as an example of a world-specific prestige class (with Forgotten Realms specifically mentioned). That couldn't be called a rip-off no matter how the issue is twisted, although I've seen plenty of complaints how WotC is trying to force FR stuff to the core rules with that. Yep. First they blame FR for stealing and not being original, and when WotC wants to give something FR-originated in return, it's evil because FR stuff has no place in Greyhawk... [ :D ]
WizO_BigSister 11-07-03, 04:02 AM	I originally left this thread open in the hope that we could behave like grown ups, and discuss the theme of what comes from where in a mature and polite fashion. I left things for a couple of days as it is not physically possible to read every post on the Realms baords every day. Since I was able to read the thread posts here have included 1/. Direct, personal attacks on other posters (as opposed to disagreeing with their ideas) 2/. Insults directed at authors (as opposed to constructive criticism of their writing). 3/. Posts that do not allow others the right to hold opinions that disagree with what the poster just said. 4/. Trolling - using insulting words like stupid; using hyperbole; deliberately provocative statements etc 5/. Obscenity - including using masking (like *****) or altered spelling to beat the word filter These are all unacceptable, and all break the Code of Conduct (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=community/coc). I am forced to close this thread. I am sorry that the members of this board can't be trusted to behave themselves. A lot of interesting and well written material has appeared here amongst the things I have described above, and it will be a shame to lose it. :( One last comment PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!