Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Seth of the First Brigade 01-18-06, 02:13 PM	Is it better and if so why?
smerwin29 01-18-06, 02:35 PM	You are going to get a lot of answers, but the biggest reason I can think of is that right now, you (a person from Georgia) could order and run approximately 40 Living Greyhawk adventures to run, and at the end of the year that number is closer to 80. And by traveling out of your region, you can have access to about 36 more (assuming you go to a different metaregion). Right now I don't even know if there is a Mark of Heroes adventure available to run for home play events. You don't need a degree in advanced mathematics to figure out that the campaign with 40-80 adventures available at all times is going to get more play than the one with between 0-3 adventures available at all times. Other people will certainly give you other opinions on quality and rules and the like, but much of that is going to be matters of taste. I would love to see how well an Eberron campaign would do if there were 40 mods available for play. Regards, Shawn
Lomiat 01-18-06, 02:39 PM	It's older and, arguably, better. Plus, it adheres to the core D&D rules, not the Eberron campaign off-shoot. Thus, LG is as *pure* D&D as a large, organized system can be. What makes LG "arguably" better is the investment players end up putting into their characters. The automatic level-bump in Mark of Heroes and similar campaigns means that you don't necessarily "earn" your character level. By contrast, you earn every single XP and GP in the LG campaign. And while that might seem like toil and prove a detriment to some players, for me and those like me, it concretes the experience. There's limited room for roleplaying flexibility in any adventure outside of a homebrew campaign, so the roleplaying involved in a large, coordinated campaign all ties directly to your conception of your character.
Arvagor 01-18-06, 02:42 PM	Well, "better" being a rather subjective term (but one which I agree with :) ), I'll throw out some reasons why I think LG has a larger following... LG has been around longer (we're starting our 6th year). The campaign has a larger body of work (i.e. mods) to run your character through. You are not limited to two characters. Yes, I know MoH lets you build/rebuild PCs as often as you want, but you really only have a choice of 2 PCs to play a mod with at any given time. The aforementioned build/rebuild option strikes some people as "cheesy" (in the negative sense). The campaign world has a much longer and (IMO) richer history than Eberron. True, there's some interesting twists (I like the idea of playing warforged, and shifters, and changelings). But the world has the history it does because it has been built on for 30 years now, not just 1 or 2.
ithardin 01-19-06, 02:34 AM	I know there are also rumors that Eberron has a limited shelf life, after-which there won't be new source material being released, etc.
Simpi 01-19-06, 03:46 AM	- Many people might see Mark of Heroes much like Legagy of Green Regent, in other words, give it couple of years and it will be gone. This does not draw me into a game, even though i'd be happy to try out Eberron. - Living Greyhawk also has the regional system which I think might be the biggest strength of it. I think it motivates people. - More adventures. Much more adventures. In addition, becoming a writer is relatively simple business as most regions are only too happy to give an intro slot for people to try their wings. - MoH has some kind of electronical database for characters and correct me if i'm wrong, but i've heard that it has lead to all kinds of trouble like wrong reporting (Hey, your character is now dead!). LG has ARs and 'paper trail'. S.H, the guy from Naerie
GenghisBob 01-19-06, 08:04 PM	Living Greyhawk is a Living Campaign. MH is a DnD Campaign and is Not a living Campaing. Persistant characters that are loved worked on and cared about, that work towards each level rather than being Level bumped and then vanishing when the DnD Cmapaign and storey line is complete is the true answer..... Hands up who really loved their LGR character? or MH Character? If there was an Eberron Living Campaign, im sure it would be almost as popular as LG. Or at least more popular then MH.
Aremedis 01-19-06, 10:06 PM	If there was an Eberron Living Campaign, im sure it would be almost as popular as LG. Or at least more popular then MH. Now that is something I would definetly be interested in. Although establishing another Circle/Triad system for another living campaign would be a LOT of work.
pedr 01-20-06, 09:12 AM	Now that is something I would definetly be interested in. Although establishing another Circle/Triad system for another living campaign would be a LOT of work.And so (realistically) never going to happen. Look at the bottlenecks in HQ for writing and releasing new MoH modules. Then remember that Eberron is a 'live' supported WotC campaign which means that the company needs to keep a close eye on all metaplot development. There's also the novel line to consider: contradictions between officially produced material is never a good thing. Then, look back at some of the delays which appear to have plagued LG before the current 'circle review' system was created, when every module had to be edited at HQ. (I wasn't playing LG back then but I've heard rumours - someone can correct me if it wasn't as bad as I am portraying it). I think the only way this could work would be if Keith Baker took on the role of plot development and module editing and the players were happy with a 'core module only' campaign. I can't envisage more than 20 modules a year, even if they were member-written and Keith Baker edited. And I should think that WotC have better (and more profitable!) things to do with his time and expertise. As an aside, people who lobby for the re-adoption of Greyhawk as a WotC supported campaign world are in some ways lobbying for the end of LG - partly because everything that has happened in the LG universe would have to disappear into non-canon and be retconned for copyright reasons, and partly because we'd never be allowed the freedom our regional triads have at the moment to devise the plots for those regions were they to threaten clashing with the vision of WotC for the world.
Simpi 01-20-06, 10:21 AM	As an aside, people who lobby for the re-adoption of Greyhawk as a WotC supported campaign world are in some ways lobbying for the end of LG - partly because everything that has happened in the LG universe would have to disappear into non-canon and be retconned for copyright reasons, and partly because we'd never be allowed the freedom our regional triads have at the moment to devise the plots for those regions were they to threaten clashing with the vision of WotC for the world. Now you are of course talking about people in regular Greyhawk boards, most who have probably not played LG, never much tried to organise it. The problem with GH fanbase in general is that it is divided into so many Pro-Gygax, Pro/Anti-Sargent, Anti-everything past the first box set factions that have their own vision of Greyhawk in mind that some would be unsatisfied nonetheless :) S.H, the guy from Naerie
Mortepierre 01-20-06, 01:29 PM	IMHO, if WotC ever brings back GH to "live" status, they'll need to issue a statement that everything that happened in LG never "really" happened. Why? Because, frankly, a lot of what happened in certain regions (no, I won't point fingers) went over the top. If we could have a true vision - right now - of where every LG region stands in 596 CY, I bet more than a few fans of the setting would groan and roll their eyes. I know the various triads have an ungrateful job, that of providing their local players with "cool" and "fun" events. Unfortunately, in most cases, this has translated into political coup, civil war, war, and/or invasion. When you consider that the nations of the Flanaess had been bled dry during the Greyhawk Wars (582-585 CY), it just doesn't make sense to have so many new conflicts so soon. Plus, it seems there was a kind of "oooh look at what our neighbours got!" effect where, if one nation experienced something, then every other nation close-by just had to have the same. Why? Because if one kid has fun, then every other kid must have fun too. I can understand the basic feeling but I regret some of the decisions that were made to remedy it. That said, yes, it did/does provide us LG members with "things" to do in-game. We get to be heroes, participate in big battles, and generally save the nation (when it's not the world) twice per month. Unfortunately, if GH is ever published again (not as LG, I mean), the world will need an overhaul to make recent history not only logical (as much as that can be in a world of heroic-fantasy) but also believable. The situation as described in the LG Gazetteer (591 CY) fits that description. The current situation doesn't (IMHO anyway). The two aren't incompatible. WotC could just as easily issue a statement to the effect that whatever happens in LG happens in a different "timeline". A possible future so to speak. Problem solved.
JohnduBois 01-20-06, 02:17 PM	That's one of the reasons that I enjoy what's going on in my region right now. While other nearby regions easier access to Limited stuff, our region has a good storyline that makes sense following the Greyhawk Wars and its results. Of course Iuz is going to try to re-invade Furyondy and get his pride back. The prince who disappeared during the wars coming back and trying to overthrow the government because the laws won't let him claim his throne makes sense, especially since the military itself is severely depleted. It especially makes sense given that the plans have developed over the course of five or six years, instead of changing the scene all at once.
smerwin29 01-20-06, 02:32 PM	WotC could just as easily issue a statement to the effect that whatever happens in LG happens in a different "timeline". A possible future so to speak. Problem solved. I ask the following question in all seriousness: is anyone actually saying that LG SHOULD be considered some sort of official continuation of the Greyhawk timeline? It doesn't seem to me there is much of a problem to solve. WotC controls the IP for Greyhawk, as far as I know. They can do or say what they want with regards to Greyhawk. I doubt they would publish any official Greyhawk material for the foreseeable future, and if they did I don't see them feeling beholden to anything that happened in LG -- although they certainly could use it if they felt it would add something to the product. To go back to the original question, this is one of the things that makes Mark of Heroes more appealing than Living Greyhawk: a lack of baggage with regards to the setting. Regards,
Reylance 01-20-06, 03:40 PM	To discuss why LG is more successful than MoH, it's helpful to look at the pros and cons of the two types of events the RPGA used to run in the 1990's: campaign (Living events, where you bring your own character) and classic (events with pregenerated characters). Campaign Pro: Design the character you want Build your character through the levels, with experience points and treasure you earned in hard-fought battles Con: Adventures are generic; not designed with your character in mind Possible mismatch between characters and adventure Classic Pro: Characters and plots interwoven to make a better story Chance to play very unusual characters Detailed role-playing notes, including impressions of the other characters Balanced party, normally designed to be able to complete the adventure Con: Only play the character once; don't care much what happens to him Mark of Heroes combines the negative aspects of both campaign and classic play, while losing the best part of campaign play, building a character through adventuring. Other points: 25 stat points does not allow you to build effective and heroic characters. 28 points is better. MoH does not have enough modules; there are not enough play opportunities. I have had fun playing MoH, but it's hard to find new games.
Itsa_Trika 01-21-06, 05:10 PM	IMHO, if WotC ever brings back GH to "live" status, they'll need to issue a statement that everything that happened in LG never "really" happened. Why? Because, frankly, a lot of what happened in certain regions (no, I won't point fingers) went over the top. If we could have a true vision - right now - of where every LG region stands in 596 CY, I bet more than a few fans of the setting would groan and roll their eyes. Greyhawk fans do that about canon history already, regardless of what happens in LG.
deusxmachina 01-24-06, 02:03 AM	Hands up who really loved their LGR character? or MH Character? I loved playing LGR, and my character probably had a lot to do with it. Another person tonight in my group said the same thing about his character. And that's why having LGR killed off like it seems to be is such a slap in the face to those who played it for the last couple years. I enjoy my MH character too, but I'd have more emotional attachment to him if I didn't have to now guard against Wizards pulling the rug out from under me like they've done with Green Regent. Want me to buy more books? That's not the way to do it. I don't mind the level bumps and other aspects of GR and MH because, for one, I know they happen and can expect it, and two, because it can be fun to play a character up through the levels without having to put seemingly endless hours in (Living Greyhawk). There's certainly room for both kinds of campaigns, but with the haphazard way Wizards treats GR, MH, and the customers who play them, it's easy to see why Living Greyhawk has such a large following. Thanks to everyone involved with Living Greyhawk, especially the mighty Highfolk. ;) If I didn't play Living Greyhawk, I wouldn't play much.
Mike Czaplinski 01-24-06, 10:32 AM	I'd love the chance to play my MoH character (Hobgoblin bard). MoH is really no competition to LG: LG has at least 6 mods a month released. MoH has gone for 2 and 3 month stretches where it had ZERO playable mods. Heck, the last time I was able to play MoH was at the premiere at WF (3 mods total). The only other convention here in the northeast that offered ANY MoH mods was Dreamation 2006 last weekend, and even there they could only muster 1 tables worth out of 5 scheduled (and of course I missed that one table). Though I can't really blame WOTC for low turnout at a small regional con, I can certainly blame their poor administration of a campaign that is supposed to show off one of their flagship products for not giving con admins any reason to schedule MoH games. I'd love to have the chance to love Mogaan (my MoH character) as much as I love Django, Starseer or M'Shaka (my LG characters), but WOTC seems bound and determined to deny me the opportunity. MikeC
grahamdrew 01-24-06, 10:34 AM	The problem with Mark of Heroes is less anything with the rules themselves (although people definitly have issues there) and more the lack of support the campaign is given. Nothing is updated on time, module releases are inconsistant, and basically everything that was promised around the launch of the campaign hasn't really materialized yet (the DM's Toolbox of Story Objects, monthly DM's Marks, Campaign Standards allowing the latest Eberron material, etc). LG has a very stong foundation, thanks to the community around it. LG uses a lot of volunteers. Everything for Mark of Heroes is centralized at the RPGA HQ. People tend to feel a lot more involved in the LG campaign than MoH as a result. LG is a lot more complex, as well. In some cases that translates into player options like metaorgs. In others, it can translate into a pretty significant barrier for new players. It has a tendency to be downright bureaucratic, which has driven many players (including myself) to other campaigns. Mark of Heroes is kind of an example of what not to do to turn some good material into an RPGA campaign. That said, there IS good material there, you just have to put up with a lot of **** to get to it. I've personally enjoyed the last few Mark of Heroes mods a lot more than the last few LG core mods I've played. The lack of mods is a big drawback, though. Don't expect to play more than twice a month (and that's a pretty generious estimate) for Mark of Heroes. It's not as bad if you're mixing it up with other campaigns, but Mark of Heroes alone has a very poor release record. Andrew Beard
Sieylianna 01-24-06, 12:27 PM	MoH has gone for 2 and 3 month stretches where it had ZERO playable mods. Heck, the last time I was able to play MoH was at the premiere at WF (3 mods total). The extended premier program really hurts MoH. LG players have other modules to play while they wait for general release of the premier modules, but MoH players have nothing to play for a couple of months. Ed
grahamdrew 01-24-06, 07:38 PM	I think the specials hurt MoH more. When you have so few mods, making ~20% of them unplayable to those who don't attend (large) cons makes it only worse. Andrew Beard
Paul H 01-27-06, 11:51 AM	Hi You're lucky to get even those mods....We in Uk are starved of new mods - just the occasional ones allowed at major cons, like Gencon, Conception etc. Whilst we have Saarbreenar in UK, I much prefer the setting of Eberron. The different storyline & races give it different flavour from other fantasy D20, which have similar plots/races/backgrounds. Does WotC really expect us to buy all these new books, when there's no real campaign in support? Definitely a missed marketing opportunity. Surely the 'Living' campaigns are the flagships that generate new interest, new players, more paying customers to their products? Possible there's less interest at WotC for Eberron, compared to Oerth, Forgotten Realms, etc, so has smaller promotions budget, ie insufficiently supported 'Living' campaign. If they've got financial constraints, then they should say so. The only way I'm going to invest more in their products is if I win tonights Lottery. (Around £105 Million) (About US$185 Million to our distant 'cousins'). :D Cheers Off to buy Lottery Tickets...
Mike Czaplinski 01-27-06, 12:26 PM	MoH is most assuredly not a "Living Campaign". And for once, I'm not being snarky. It is a "Dungeons & Dragons Campaign", which means it is centrally administered and sanctioned by the RPGA. They retain editorial control over the content of the mods directly. "Living Campaigns" are administered by outside agencies, who are responsible for plotting campaign arcs and writing adventures. These outside agencies are the ones who approve content of mods, not the RPGA itself, though the RPGA still sanctions play in them. The most visible of these is Living Greyhawk, of course, but there are others. The reason they are termed as "Living" is that the direction of the campaign is supposed to be shaped by the actions of PC's. D&D Campaigns have no such implied promise, though one would hope that the RPGA would follow that model, especially given the leisurely release schedule of mods for MoH. So, it is a misnomer to call MoH "Living Eberron" (as I was wont to do early in MoH's existance). In many ways. MikeC