Small Gripe about some Sourcebooks [Archive] - Wizards Community

Small Gripe about some Sourcebooks [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Paladin3475
06-25-05, 08:34 PM I know that there are basically 4 worlds still in production for D&D:

- Greyhawk
- Forgotten Realms
- Eberron
- Dragonlance

For the life of me, could you please branch away from greyhawk?

In the non-FR based sourcebooks, it defaults to Greyhawk. While nice if you play in Greyhawk, it absolutely sucks if you are a big into the FR. Also since greyhawk is older than dirt, does anyone still play in that world anymore?

*waits for flames to erupt around him*

Okay... it would be okay to keep greyhawk around, but could you please add some emphasis on Forgotten Realms? I was scanning through one sourcebook and maybe a good 2/3's had no effect on a FR campaign without casing some hybrid Greyhawk / FR game or taking "DM Option" and warping the material to fit into a FR setting. I am not asking for much here, maybe a trade off for some of the dieties. Instead of creating a new god, maybe tie to to a god which got punted out of FR when you changed versions. Even a little cheat sheet where if you say Iz in Greyhawk you can refer to him as Bane in FR.

As for world popularity, let's run through it on the computer game front:

- NWN - Forgotten Realms. Hit
- Baldur's Gate - Forgotten Realms. Hit
- BG 2 - Forgotten Realms. Hit
- Icewind Dale - Forgotten Realms. Hit
- Icewind Dale 2 - Forgotten Realms. Mixed
- Temple of Elemental Evil - Greyhawk - Flop
- Ruins of Myth Drannor - FR - Flop

So the FR games are better. This could be because of the companies which made them (ToEE was dreadful.. esp with the mechanics), but games like NWN have taken off immensely. Of the persistent worlds, most are FR in design and basis. Only a small handful are Greyhawk.

I guess what I am trying to say is which such the emphasis on Greyhawk which is not as popular over Forgotten Realms, which is immensely popular?

Thanks,
Paladin
Alac Luin
06-25-05, 09:07 PM It is no secret.
Not Everyone is a Fan on the Forgotten Realms.

Now, all new material has to be placed "somewhere", so it uses Grayhawk which is as Generic as can be.

MM 3 was great with what they did, made a "in the Realms" and "in Eberron" at the end of monster descriptions that fit the best in these particular worlds.

Since Dragonlance d20 material in not in WotC's hands, it just gets left alone.
Faraer
06-25-05, 10:22 PM Lots of people play in the World of Greyhawk. No figures are available, but it's consistently the 2nd or 3rd most popular setting in ENWorld polls. Its tropes, gods, and famous characters are common currency among D&D players, and they are linked directly to D&D, whereas the Realms is a preexisting world that was partly adapted to D&D. So what if it's old? The Realms is older. Middle-earth is older still. Age has nothing to do with it.

Greyhawk fans, of which I'm one, aren't happy with what Wizards is doing either. Instead of detailed support, the World of Greyhawk being the 'default setting' amounts to little more than it providing names of gods and places in the splatbooks. These scraps aren't even official Greyhawk lore, since they're technically in a variant setting called Greyhawk Light.

Most of the core-D&D designers aren't especially fond or knowledgable about the WoG. Do you think they know the Realms better? As well as Eric Boyd, or Rich Baker? Imagine what would happen if the Realms was the 'default setting'. You'd have all sorts of contrived quasi-Realmslore where the Realms was used as an exhibition ground for all the latest rules variants and new races; the setting would be bent around at the rules' expense far more than it is now. The Realms has a different flavour from current D&D, and forcing them together would be no good for anybody.
Iron Klaw Merc
06-26-05, 04:27 PM I would have to say as a Greyhawker myself, that Greyhawk gets very little coverage, so taking away the little that it does get does not make alot of sense from my point of view. If they came out with the occasional Greyhawk source book (even just one or two books a year) then it would be no big deal to change the default world, but I don't think thats happening anytime to soon.
Ranger REG
06-26-05, 04:54 PM I know that there are basically 4 worlds still in production for D&D:

- Greyhawk
- Forgotten Realms
- Eberron
- Dragonlance

For the life of me, could you please branch away from greyhawk?

In the non-FR based sourcebooks, it defaults to Greyhawk. While nice if you play in Greyhawk, it absolutely sucks if you are a big into the FR. Also since greyhawk is older than dirt, does anyone still play in that world anymore?

*waits for flames to erupt around him*
*casts fireball, singeing posters' hair in the area of effect* :devil:

With all due respect, I have no problem with the GH material. And while I'm an FR fan, my world is my own to run and play in. I'm certain that there are other FR gamers that make Abeir-Toril their own world and not worry too much violating any party-line continuity. I have managed to (for example) adapt Knight Protectors and Radiant Servant of Pelor (now of Lathander) into my FR campaign.

What can I say? I have been playing D&D since the introduction of FR boxed set (the gray-colored version) in 1987. I have since tinkered with the rules. :cool:

If you are so dead-set about separating FR from other campaign-specific material then that's your choice. :bored:
Paladin3475
06-26-05, 11:09 PM *casts fireball, singeing posters' hair in the area of effect* :devil:

With all due respect, I have no problem with the GH material. And while I'm an FR fan, my world is my own to run and play in. I'm certain that there are other FR gamers that make Abeir-Toril their own world and not worry too much violating any party-line continuity. I have managed to (for example) adapt Knight Protectors and Radiant Servant of Pelor (now of Lathander) into my FR campaign.

What can I say? I have been playing D&D since the introduction of FR boxed set (the gray-colored version) in 1987. I have since tinkered with the rules. :cool:

If you are so dead-set about separating FR from other campaign-specific material then that's your choice. :bored:

Aye... but I tend to deal with a great number of "purists" which for the life of me, I wonder if they should get a life of their own... They memorize all the rules... Even the variants :P

Since I mostly do D&D anymore via NWN, have to be careful of what is done since some people tend not to like my "interpetations" :P

Anyways, was just asking so it would make it easier :P

Holy
Link182
06-26-05, 11:15 PM I think Greyhawk would be better if they made a book similar to the FRCS. I doubt it'll ever be FR but it could be interesting.
Sakeninja
06-27-05, 02:30 PM I think Greyhawk would be better if they made a book similar to the FRCS. I doubt it'll ever be FR but it could be interesting.

Sure...that is all we need, umpteen million Chosen of Boccob running around......

Death to The Chosen!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lashan
06-27-05, 02:54 PM I, also, play in Greyhawk. It's a great setting with a lot of history and depth to it as well. Currently, I am playing in two GH campaigns and not a single FR game. I still like FR. There are a lot of people out there that DETEST the Forgotten Realms. They might even be turned away from some WOTC books if it had FR stuff in it.

It's true that Greyhawk doesn't get much support at all. It was suppose to be the "default" game world, but it isn't really. All those modules that game out? Generic. What GH books have come out with 3E? One. The Gazeteer. That's it. Sure, you get a lot of splat books with some PrC's in them, but that's all you get. We all know how much we need MORE PrC's at this point. As stated earlier, GH is still the 2nd or 3rd most popular game world. It should get SOME support.

Lastly, it isn't that hard to convert the Greyhawk stuff to FR. Temple Raiders of Oldimmara = Temple Raiders of Mask. Hieronious = Torm. There IS a list of conversions to FR gods. It's in the FRCS.
Ranger REG
06-28-05, 05:14 AM I think Greyhawk would be better if they made a book similar to the FRCS. I doubt it'll ever be FR but it could be interesting.
While I'm not as big a fan of Greyhawk as I am with FR, I truly do not see the harm in WotC taking over the publication of the Greyhawk line from RPGA (the supposed caretaker) and release one major campaign setting corebook full of maps and info about the setting.

Granted, no two Greyhawk game are alike but at least players will have some kind of idea (cultural and visual) what world (or as Shakespeare puts it, "the stage") they're playing in, RPGA-sanctioned or not.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Paladin3475 06-25-05, 08:34 PM	I know that there are basically 4 worlds still in production for D&D: - Greyhawk - Forgotten Realms - Eberron - Dragonlance For the life of me, could you please branch away from greyhawk? In the non-FR based sourcebooks, it defaults to Greyhawk. While nice if you play in Greyhawk, it absolutely sucks if you are a big into the FR. Also since greyhawk is older than dirt, does anyone still play in that world anymore? waits for flames to erupt around him Okay... it would be okay to keep greyhawk around, but could you please add some emphasis on Forgotten Realms? I was scanning through one sourcebook and maybe a good 2/3's had no effect on a FR campaign without casing some hybrid Greyhawk / FR game or taking "DM Option" and warping the material to fit into a FR setting. I am not asking for much here, maybe a trade off for some of the dieties. Instead of creating a new god, maybe tie to to a god which got punted out of FR when you changed versions. Even a little cheat sheet where if you say Iz in Greyhawk you can refer to him as Bane in FR. As for world popularity, let's run through it on the computer game front: - NWN - Forgotten Realms. Hit - Baldur's Gate - Forgotten Realms. Hit - BG 2 - Forgotten Realms. Hit - Icewind Dale - Forgotten Realms. Hit - Icewind Dale 2 - Forgotten Realms. Mixed - Temple of Elemental Evil - Greyhawk - Flop - Ruins of Myth Drannor - FR - Flop So the FR games are better. This could be because of the companies which made them (ToEE was dreadful.. esp with the mechanics), but games like NWN have taken off immensely. Of the persistent worlds, most are FR in design and basis. Only a small handful are Greyhawk. I guess what I am trying to say is which such the emphasis on Greyhawk which is not as popular over Forgotten Realms, which is immensely popular? Thanks, Paladin
Alac Luin 06-25-05, 09:07 PM	It is no secret. Not Everyone is a Fan on the Forgotten Realms. Now, all new material has to be placed "somewhere", so it uses Grayhawk which is as Generic as can be. MM 3 was great with what they did, made a "in the Realms" and "in Eberron" at the end of monster descriptions that fit the best in these particular worlds. Since Dragonlance d20 material in not in WotC's hands, it just gets left alone.
Faraer 06-25-05, 10:22 PM	Lots of people play in the World of Greyhawk. No figures are available, but it's consistently the 2nd or 3rd most popular setting in ENWorld polls. Its tropes, gods, and famous characters are common currency among D&D players, and they are linked directly to D&D, whereas the Realms is a preexisting world that was partly adapted to D&D. So what if it's old? The Realms is older. Middle-earth is older still. Age has nothing to do with it. Greyhawk fans, of which I'm one, aren't happy with what Wizards is doing either. Instead of detailed support, the World of Greyhawk being the 'default setting' amounts to little more than it providing names of gods and places in the splatbooks. These scraps aren't even official Greyhawk lore, since they're technically in a variant setting called Greyhawk Light. Most of the core-D&D designers aren't especially fond or knowledgable about the WoG. Do you think they know the Realms better? As well as Eric Boyd, or Rich Baker? Imagine what would happen if the Realms was the 'default setting'. You'd have all sorts of contrived quasi-Realmslore where the Realms was used as an exhibition ground for all the latest rules variants and new races; the setting would be bent around at the rules' expense far more than it is now. The Realms has a different flavour from current D&D, and forcing them together would be no good for anybody.
Iron Klaw Merc 06-26-05, 04:27 PM	I would have to say as a Greyhawker myself, that Greyhawk gets very little coverage, so taking away the little that it does get does not make alot of sense from my point of view. If they came out with the occasional Greyhawk source book (even just one or two books a year) then it would be no big deal to change the default world, but I don't think thats happening anytime to soon.
Ranger REG 06-26-05, 04:54 PM	I know that there are basically 4 worlds still in production for D&D: - Greyhawk - Forgotten Realms - Eberron - Dragonlance For the life of me, could you please branch away from greyhawk? In the non-FR based sourcebooks, it defaults to Greyhawk. While nice if you play in Greyhawk, it absolutely sucks if you are a big into the FR. Also since greyhawk is older than dirt, does anyone still play in that world anymore? waits for flames to erupt around him casts fireball, singeing posters' hair in the area of effect :devil: With all due respect, I have no problem with the GH material. And while I'm an FR fan, my world is my own to run and play in. I'm certain that there are other FR gamers that make Abeir-Toril their own world and not worry too much violating any party-line continuity. I have managed to (for example) adapt Knight Protectors and Radiant Servant of Pelor (now of Lathander) into my FR campaign. What can I say? I have been playing D&D since the introduction of FR boxed set (the gray-colored version) in 1987. I have since tinkered with the rules. :cool: If you are so dead-set about separating FR from other campaign-specific material then that's your choice. :bored:
Paladin3475 06-26-05, 11:09 PM	casts fireball, singeing posters' hair in the area of effect :devil: With all due respect, I have no problem with the GH material. And while I'm an FR fan, my world is my own to run and play in. I'm certain that there are other FR gamers that make Abeir-Toril their own world and not worry too much violating any party-line continuity. I have managed to (for example) adapt Knight Protectors and Radiant Servant of Pelor (now of Lathander) into my FR campaign. What can I say? I have been playing D&D since the introduction of FR boxed set (the gray-colored version) in 1987. I have since tinkered with the rules. :cool: If you are so dead-set about separating FR from other campaign-specific material then that's your choice. :bored: Aye... but I tend to deal with a great number of "purists" which for the life of me, I wonder if they should get a life of their own... They memorize all the rules... Even the variants :P Since I mostly do D&D anymore via NWN, have to be careful of what is done since some people tend not to like my "interpetations" :P Anyways, was just asking so it would make it easier :P Holy
Link182 06-26-05, 11:15 PM	I think Greyhawk would be better if they made a book similar to the FRCS. I doubt it'll ever be FR but it could be interesting.
Sakeninja 06-27-05, 02:30 PM	I think Greyhawk would be better if they made a book similar to the FRCS. I doubt it'll ever be FR but it could be interesting. Sure...that is all we need, umpteen million Chosen of Boccob running around...... Death to The Chosen!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lashan 06-27-05, 02:54 PM	I, also, play in Greyhawk. It's a great setting with a lot of history and depth to it as well. Currently, I am playing in two GH campaigns and not a single FR game. I still like FR. There are a lot of people out there that DETEST the Forgotten Realms. They might even be turned away from some WOTC books if it had FR stuff in it. It's true that Greyhawk doesn't get much support at all. It was suppose to be the "default" game world, but it isn't really. All those modules that game out? Generic. What GH books have come out with 3E? One. The Gazeteer. That's it. Sure, you get a lot of splat books with some PrC's in them, but that's all you get. We all know how much we need MORE PrC's at this point. As stated earlier, GH is still the 2nd or 3rd most popular game world. It should get SOME support. Lastly, it isn't that hard to convert the Greyhawk stuff to FR. Temple Raiders of Oldimmara = Temple Raiders of Mask. Hieronious = Torm. There IS a list of conversions to FR gods. It's in the FRCS.
Ranger REG 06-28-05, 05:14 AM	I think Greyhawk would be better if they made a book similar to the FRCS. I doubt it'll ever be FR but it could be interesting. While I'm not as big a fan of Greyhawk as I am with FR, I truly do not see the harm in WotC taking over the publication of the Greyhawk line from RPGA (the supposed caretaker) and release one major campaign setting corebook full of maps and info about the setting. Granted, no two Greyhawk game are alike but at least players will have some kind of idea (cultural and visual) what world (or as Shakespeare puts it, "the stage") they're playing in, RPGA-sanctioned or not.