I am really surprised that there seems to be few people like myself who want the classic Greyhawk world back. I know generic world from the PHB is based on it but it is NOT the same. Maybe it’s because I’m old (40) and I miss what started it all for me. But in a sense it really started it all for all of us. Many of the famous monsters we fight today have their origins there as do many of the spells and deities. I certainly miss all of the wonderful times I had there.
Greyhawk is the brilliant world of Bigby, Melf and classic campaigns like Temple of Elemental Evil and Against the Giants, famous deities such as Nerull, Pelor, Vecna and Gruumsh and of course I could go on and on but I’ve rambled enough. I am sure many of you know these things but for those of you who have never played these old classic campaigns in the Greyhawk world it’s just too bad because it was literally a blast.
Bringing the classic Greyhawk campaign setting back seems to me a fitting tribute to Gary Gygax, the late grandfather of RPG and specifically D&D. It may also awaken some of those old fossils lounging around cyber space to once again pick up the sword and shield…I mean pencil and paper and rediscover what no video game can deliver; The magical and fantastic journey of imagination we call Dungeons & dragons.
I am really surprised that there seems to be few people like myself who want the classic Greyhawk world back. I know generic world from the PHB is based on it but it is NOT the same. Maybe it’s because I’m old (40) and I miss what started it all for me. But in a sense it really started it all for all of us. Many of the famous monsters we fight today have their origins there as do many of the spells and deities. I certainly miss all of the wonderful times I had there.
Greyhawk is the brilliant world of Bigby, Melf and classic campaigns like Temple of Elemental Evil and Against the Giants, famous deities such as Nerull, Pelor, Vecna and Gruumsh and of course I could go on and on but I’ve rambled enough. I am sure many of you know these things but for those of you who have never played these old classic campaigns in the Greyhawk world it’s just too bad because it was literally a blast.
Bringing the classic Greyhawk campaign setting back seems to me a fitting tribute to Gary Gygax, the late grandfather of RPG and specifically D&D. It may also awaken some of those old fossils lounging around cyber space to once again pick up the sword and shield…I mean pencil and paper and rediscover what no video game can deliver; The magical and fantastic journey of imagination we call Dungeons & dragons.
IMHO, the best tribute to Gary Gygax isn't playing the Greyhawk setting, but rather playing D&D period. Gary's legacy as an author and setting designer (and, hell, even as a rules designer) pales in comparison to his legacy as the person who got people to get together, play a regular friendly game with one another, and have a heck of a lot of fun imagining fantastic places and things together. Doing those things is the number one way to honour the guy's contribution; community was his focus, not the game itself, I believe.
All that said, I think a 4E Greyhawk is almost inevitable, though we'll probably be waiting for a few more years...
IMHO, the best tribute to Gary Gygax isn't playing the Greyhawk setting, but rather playing D&D period. Gary's legacy as an author and setting designer (and, hell, even as a rules designer) pales in comparison to his legacy as the person who got people to get together, play a regular friendly game with one another, and have a heck of a lot of fun imagining fantastic places and things together. Doing those things is the number one way to honour the guy's contribution; community was his focus, not the game itself, I believe.
All that said, I think a 4E Greyhawk is almost inevitable, though we'll probably be waiting for a few more years...
I couldn't agree with you more. I didn't say it was the best tribute, I said it would be " a fitting tribute". I sure hope you're right about 4e Greyhawk being inevitable.
I couldn't agree with you more. I didn't say it was the best tribute, I said it would be " a fitting tribute". I sure hope you're right about 4e Greyhawk being inevitable.
That's true, it might be a very fitting tribute, to play Greyhawk. I'm just used to people getting hung-up on Greyhawk or AD&D, when IMHO those things weren't really Gary's strongest contributions.
WotC has mentioned that they need to "keep their intellectual properties from getting 'dusty'." Greyhawk's not the dustiest, so it's not high on the list, I don't think, but it's iconic enough to be a contender eventually. FWIW, you can probably use your old Greyhawk fluff mostly just-fine with 4E mechanics -- but you probably already knew that. :P
While we wait patiently, Happy Gaming to you, Nyde!
Secondly it would be nice to see a return of Greyhawk, but the truth is aside from nostalga it has little uniqueness to bring to the table. WotC wants to publish settings that each are "generic", but has one or two twists that seperate it from the rest. If settings were only fluff this would be easy, and they could produce settings with ease. But each setting book also has to carry some new crunch, and thats were Greyhawk falls flat. The original designers never considered needing this unique factor to back Greyhawk, it was all there was. Nearly all that was Greyhawk has been absorbed into the "generic" background fluff of 4e, or has been carted off by another (and yes "younger") campaign setting...such as Drow being absorbed by FR.
So really unless they can come up with some hook that makes Greyhawk stand out (besides it age), I don't think it will return as a setting. As it is most of that original world is Dungeons & Dragons, Gygax could ask for little more and still be a very proud soul.
If you know other 40ish folks that used to play and then stopped, take the leap and bring them back. Grab the old Greyhawk maps and the 4e books, and run a new game using the old background setting and fluff of Greyhawk (generic 4e fits the world perfectly). Your friends will find it both reminiscent of the past, while new and exciting at the same time. Now if they are the narrow minded' "anything new is bad" type people then this won't work...but then I guess for those types nothing will. If not I'm sure they will find plenty to hold their interest in the years to come to make "new" fans out of them.
First off...your not old...your only 40 (if thats old then I'm nearly dead), and many many of us "fossils" are still playing (of the 4 groups I play in only one has 2 players under 30).
Secondly it would be nice to see a return of Greyhawk, but the truth is aside from nostalga it has little uniqueness to bring to the table. WotC wants to publish settings that each are "generic", but has one or two twists that seperate it from the rest. If settings were only fluff this would be easy, and they could produce settings with ease. But each setting book also has to carry some new crunch, and thats were Greyhawk falls flat. The original designers never considered needing this unique factor to back Greyhawk, it was all there was. Nearly all that was Greyhawk has been absorbed into the "generic" background fluff of 4e, or has been carted off by another (and yes "younger") campaign setting...such as Drow being absorbed by FR.
So really unless they can come up with some hook that makes Greyhawk stand out (besides it age), I don't think it will return as a setting. As it is most of that original world is Dungeons & Dragons, Gygax could ask for little more and still be a very proud soul.
If you know other 40ish folks that used to play and then stopped, take the leap and bring them back. Grab the old Greyhawk maps and the 4e books, and run a new game using the old background setting and fluff of Greyhawk (generic 4e fits the world perfectly). Your friends will find it both reminiscent of the past, while new and exciting at the same time. Now if they are the narrow minded' "anything new is bad" type people then this won't work...but then I guess for those types nothing will. If not I'm sure they will find plenty to hold their interest in the years to come to make "new" fans out of them.
Greyhawk is indeed ideal generic world. I much prefer it over FR for a basic world. As far as bringing something new to the table that's easy. Add it. That's what it's all about. I simply like the city itself, the Gods and the vibe that I get from it. I am always trying to bring some of my older friends back to the game but many of them just don't like the direction things are headed with regards to 4e. Two come to mind right off who said they would come back when Greyhawk returns. We have offered to run campaigns there but that doesn't cut it for them.
On another note, I have always wondered why people prefer to write unagreeable posts over friendly agreeable ones? Not that I am accusing anyone here of this but I see more people bickering than I do people being kind to one another. If you disagree with someone that's cool, but remember when you write your post to try and not be hostile. I wouldn't start a post with "First off..."
Anyhow, sorry if my humor offended you. It was certainly not my intention.
Cheers. :D
Happy Gaming to you too Doctorhook. Thanks for the post.
[IMG]
Greyhawk is the brilliant world of Bigby, Melf and classic campaigns like Temple of Elemental Evil and Against the Giants, famous deities such as Nerull, Pelor, Vecna and Gruumsh and of course I could go on and on but I’ve rambled enough.
3ed and 4ed beat up Greyhawk and took its stuff. The classic adventures and deities have been co-opted into the generic D&D experience, and as such, are not Greyhawk specific. It's like Shakespeare's plays: they become so influential, they become a part of culture and are embedded so deeply into our language and entertainment that the original seems cliche.
The bolded parts above are the best selling points. Bigby, Melf, and Iuz are still generally considered to be Greyhawk-specific, so any campaign setting would have to give good attention to the Circle of Eight and other prominent NPCs.
But before they commit resources to developing Greyhawk as a campaign world, they have to be satisfied that it's commercially viable and will bring something new to the table. It wouldn't surprise me if the Wizards developers felt that Greyhawk, while holding a lot of sentimental value, might be more trouble than it's worth, at least for now.
A published world must be deemed fit for use with the 4e system. While some will show up as readymades - Eberron, and probably Dark Sun when they do that - others will be given some major surgery. FR is, of course, the prime example so far. Would Greyhawk need extensive alterations to work with 4e, and to stand out from the other settings? I don't know, but if it would, Wizards are in danger of incurring the wrath of many hardcore Greyhawk fans.
What do players want, Greyhawk for 4e, or Greyhawk as Gygax intended it? That's not really a choice. If it appears as a published setting, we'll get Greyhawk for 4e. But if the bloc of Greyhawk fans actually want the latter, then Wizards will only be wasting their time - and courting lots of abuse - trying to make a 4e-friendly Greyhawk. It would be a no-brainer for them to do Dark Sun, Ravenloft or a new setting instead.
However, it would be nice to see information on the 4e Greyhawk Gods and their domains etc, and 4e stats for some of the major npcs to give us a bit of guidance.
Having said that, the 4e version of Lareth was totally unsuitable for my own campaign (my own version is floating around in here somewhere - probably in the Greyhawk board) so any official stuff is only going to serve as guidance and inspiration.
...On another note, I have always wondered why people prefer to write unagreeable posts over friendly agreeable ones? Not that I am accusing anyone here of this but I see more people bickering than I do people being kind to one another. If you disagree with someone that's cool, but remember when you write your post to try and not be hostile. I wouldn't start a post with "First off..."
Sorry if I offended anyone with my starting words in my last post...I just never knew "First off" sounded hostile, I always thought it was just an idiom meaning "the first thing" (I could see if it was followed by a negative adjective directed at someone, but it wasn't).
So to clarify I only used "First off" because I intended to speak about two different subjects (and did), not to be hostile, rude, or otherwise combative. If anyone took it as such I do apologize. It may have seemed that I took the "40 being old" comment as insulting (there are many my age who would have), but I did not. I had hoped the rest of my comment had shown I was joking around with a fellow "elder". Again I apologize, and will watch how I phrase things in the future so as to try not to unintentionally offend anyone.
As to your other question...I think its because when someone agrees with you, they just nod their head instead of posting a "ditto" post just to show they have the same train of thought. Now if someone dosen't agree or has a different take on something they will be quick to point out their side (because silence seems to indicate agreement). If the discussion can remain civil and productive though I guess relies upon the posters being sensible and mature enough to keep level heads.
I never played the old modules so all i know of it is being the implied setting for 3e, and the gods always seemed kinda meh to me, they just seemed really one dimensional. Could someone please tell me a little about what makes grey hawk better than forgotten realms? Not that Im a huge fan of old forgotten realms but the new forgotten realms in 4e is a decent setting. Im just not familiar with grey hawk. As for 4e id rather see Darksun, a new setting, spelljammer, then possibly grey hawk.
Greyhawk is quite basic - very similar to Middle-Earth but with a strong D&D overlay. So most of the kingdoms belong to the humans with only pockets of grumpy demi-humans here and there. Human culture is simple with only four major racial types for the humans albeit that their cultures have been diluted by migration and intermarriage. You have Sauron in the form of Iuz. Great wizards in the form of the Circle of Eight. You have corrupt Medieval Europe in the Great Kingdom; Chivalrous Medieval Europe in Furyondy, Keoland, Urnst, and Nyrond; Mongol hordes mixed with a bit of native american in the Nomads and Paynim; Arabians in the Far West; Vikings in the Barbarian lands; jungle savages in the Amedio and Hepmonaland; sinister white supremacists in the Scarlet Brotherhood; and demi-human realms in the Ulek states and Celene. Then you have the lost lands invaded by giants, humanoids, or the forces of Iuz and the remnants of the ancient empires to the west. The threat of Tharizdun being released from his prison hangs over everything.
It's all fighting fantasy 101 but still great fun to play. The politics is really simple and the players don't get bogged down by too much detail moving from one country and one adventure to the next.
Greyhawk is quite basic - very similar to Middle-Earth but with a strong D&D overlay. So most of the kingdoms belong to the humans with only pockets of grumpy demi-humans here and there. Human culture is simple with only four major racial types for the humans albeit that their cultures have been diluted by migration and intermarriage. You have Sauron in the form of Iuz. Great wizards in the form of the Circle of Eight. You have corrupt Medieval Europe in the Great Kingdom; Chivalrous Medieval Europe in Furyondy, Keoland, Urnst, and Nyrond; Mongol hordes mixed with a bit of native american in the Nomads and Paynim; Arabians in the Far West; Vikings in the Barbarian lands; jungle savages in the Amedio and Hepmonaland; sinister white supremacists in the Scarlet Brotherhood; and demi-human realms in the Ulek states and Celene. Then you have the lost lands invaded by giants, humanoids, or the forces of Iuz and the remnants of the ancient empires to the west. The threat of Tharizdun being released from his prison hangs over everything.
It's all fighting fantasy 101 but still great fun to play. The politics is really simple and the players don't get bogged down by too much detail moving from one country and one adventure to the next.
Eh if they made it less human centric it might be interesting. Ive just kinda gotten sick of fantasy settings where 90% of the world is human. Sounds kinda neat though. If they do adapt it id like to see it reimagined, ie less human centric and more involved politics. I like Ebaron with its shady dealings and political backstabbing.
What I'd wish they would do is bring back the setting Chainmail was set in and develop the Western Flanaess. A number of people (myself included) have been clamoring for more lore on this part of Oerth of which there is very little currently. It's a bigger area with plenty of room to place whatever WOTC wants to place without messing with established canon, as there is practically none.
Honestly, I'd like to see Greyhawk sometime down the line.
Why? For me it's the fact that I'd like a 100% generic fantasy world. Sure, FR covers part of this, but I have accumulated a great dislike for the Realms and would rather have another option at hand.
Well, then the good news is that you DO have such an option.
All you need to do is track down a copy of the 1e GH boxed set. Personally I've also found the Living GH gazzetteer & the old 1e campaign setting usefull/interesting.
And you can aquire all 3 of these relitively cheap.
That's it, that's all you really need. From there you spin your own stories....
Off-topic
It's funny how we've all come to say that Greyhawk is a "generic" fantasy world for D&D. (I do it, too.)
I'm not judging anyone here, I'm just making some observations. I'm just curious about how exactly we came to label Greyhawk as "generic".
My best guess is that it's "generic" because it became the baseline for D&D, and not because of any inherently "generic" quality to it. In other words, I think it was probably distinctly "D&D", and grew to be D&D and indistinguishable from D&D.
Honestly, I'd like to see Greyhawk sometime down the line.
Why? For me it's the fact that [Greyhawk is] a 100% generic fantasy world.
It's funny how we've all come to say that Greyhawk is a "generic" fantasy world for D&D. (I do it, too.)
- I wonder if we see it as "generic" because it's one of the oldest campaign setting for D&D, and because Greyhawk defined a lot of what has become D&D.
- I wonder if it's because Greyhawk perhaps most closely mirrors some of the inspirational material upon which D&D was built -- Tolkien, for example.
- I wonder if D&Ders in the 1970s thought that Greyhawk was "generic"; we now sometimes say that the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are "generic" settings, but were they considered "generic" when they were introduced? (Note that both FR and DL have also been around for several decades now, as well.)
- I wonder if we don't use the word "generic" when we mean "traditional", or even other, more cynical words, such as "cliched" or "boring". Such words might be more descriptive than "generic", but each one suggests a different impression the setting has made. To call Greyhawk "traditional" sounds a lot more positive than "stale", though both terms get used, and objectively speaking, both could be valid impressions of the setting.
- I wonder if twenty years from now people will call Eberron "generic". Certainly 4E has incorporated many of Eberron's traits into its "core"; additionally, RPGs as a whole have been progressively influenced by similar "magi-tech" fantasy elements to Eberron (especially Japanese CRPGs). If this trend keeps up, will Eberron become defined as a "boring, traditional" setting by 5E or 6E?
I'm not judging anyone here, I'm just making some observations. I'm just curious about how exactly we came to label Greyhawk as "generic".
My best guess is that it's "generic" because it became the baseline for D&D, and not because of any inherently "generic" quality to it. In other words, I think it was probably distinctly "D&D", and grew to be D&D and indistinguishable from D&D.
Which is really a misnomer, because Gygax, Greenwood, and Weis/Hickman couldn't choose to have their work be different or similar to Eberron. The "generic" settings were working on baseline assumptions of what D&D setting had to be in the day. There were no magic trains or mass-produced magic items in these settings, probably because that very idea sounded like a non-starter for a fantasy setting, and other attempts at this were just horrible.
Once a setting like Eberron comes out and does it right, the modern reader begins to unfairly judge the older settings. Eberron gets the benfit of riffing the good ideas off of the older settings, and adding new twists. Greyhawk, made in the 1970s, is trapped by the creative choices made back then. We wonder why Gygax choose to do X instead of Y, when in reality, he didn't know Y was an option!
Something Greyhawk/Mystara/Dragonlance/Forgotten Realms all share is that the tone of the fluff is distinct. Elminster couldn't be from Mystara, and neither could Mordenkainen be the long-lost brother of Raistlin. Tonally, each setting plays the "generic" setting in a different tune, focusing on different aspects (Dragons, the gods, archmages, etc.). Eberron and Dark Sun have their own tones, but these greatly influence the worlds in more than superficial ways.
Alter?boy brings up a good point about context and the older settings. I find I have to explain similar points to RPG players and fantasy fans who are critical of Middle-Earth.
It all depends on how respectful of the settings and the fanbase the updating is. I haven't been able to look through 4E Eb. yet but I don't want another setting put through the meat grinder like 4E FR.
I'd like to to see a campaign guide for greyhawk for 4e, a ghpg, not so much, as by that time anything of usefulness will be in the powers books.
on the otherhand, they'd butcher it too.
but its theirs and they are free to do with as they see fit.
but maybe they would leave the dearly departed's characters well enough alone, save kill boccob and elevate Mordinkainin.
I think revisiting and updating the old settings is a good idea.
Alter?boy brings up a good point about context and the older settings. I find I have to explain similar points to RPG players and fantasy fans who are critical of Middle-Earth.
It all depends on how respectful of the settings and the fanbase the updating is. I haven't been able to look through 4E Eb. yet but I don't want another setting put through the meat grinder like 4E FR.
I dont see it as being put through a meat grinder. If they did do it they would have to do something to it. A setting can change and develop. Personally Im very very happy with the new realms.
I would really like to see a Greyhawk PG/CG that updates the settings timeline through including all develpements from Living Greyhawk.
This would be fun but do you have any idea how much information there is out there? I'm updating my own notes on Keoland with gazeteer information from the LG adventures (things like locations in town, names of npcs, factions & groups etc) rather than plot elements and there is a ton of information. It's going to take me years to update everything.
I suppose the problem they have if they re-do the setting is that they have to change a load of stuff to make it worth their while. I don't really want that. What I'd like to see is articles in Dragon and modules in Dungeon like we used to get. They can then write stuff about locations that were previously undetailed (like the articles on Diamond Lake and Alhaster) instead of re-hashing the city of Greyhawk all over again.
I would really like to see a Greyhawk PG/CG that updates the settings timeline through including all develpements from Living Greyhawk.
When they talked about Greyhawk for 4th edition at Gencon last year they stated that it would be rolled back to before all the LG stuff. Which none the less upset quite a few LG people. They were losing their campaign and now their 8 years of work and lore etc were, well just a dream apparently.
When they talked about Greyhawk for 4th edition at Gencon last year they stated that it would be rolled back to before all the LG stuff. Which none the less upset quite a few LG people. They were losing their campaign and now their 8 years of work and lore etc were, well just a dream apparently.
Yes, I heard that as well and instandly felt the same way you describe. I'd rather see no 4e Greyhawk at all rather than one that adds insult to injury by erasing all the great creative work done throughout all the years of LG.
Especially since the finishs of most regions are crawling with potential plot hooks.
This would be fun but do you have any idea how much information there is out there? I'm updating my own notes on Keoland with gazeteer information from the LG adventures (things like locations in town, names of npcs, factions & groups etc) rather than plot elements and there is a ton of information. It's going to take me years to update everything.
So there was no final summary done? That makes it of course more difficult. I know that all the events of the German region were added as a final result to the german LG website. So I think it would only be moderate (as compared to write up something new from scratch) work to compile it into the region's write up in a possible 4e Greyhawk Campaign Guide.
Of course a "moderate" effort for each and every region also adds up to a lot of effort, but since they would have effort to make up their own write up for each and every region anyway. All in all I think it would still be less work to just compile the LG things that have alreay been written then to write everything from scratch
Honestly, I'd like to see Greyhawk sometime down the line.
Why? For me it's the fact that I'd like a 100% generic fantasy world. Sure, FR covers part of this, but I have accumulated a great dislike for the Realms and would rather have another option at hand.
But for the next three years I'd rather see totally new stuff that is just new, intriguing and fun.
I agree 100%
This is the reason for this thread.
Sorry if I offended anyone with my starting words in my last post...I just never knew "First off" sounded hostile, I always thought it was just an idiom meaning "the first thing" (I could see if it was followed by a negative adjective directed at someone, but it wasn't).
So to clarify I only used "First off" because I intended to speak about two different subjects (and did), not to be hostile, rude, or otherwise combative. If anyone took it as such I do apologize. It may have seemed that I took the "40 being old" comment as insulting (there are many my age who would have), but I did not. I had hoped the rest of my comment had shown I was joking around with a fellow "elder". Again I apologize, and will watch how I phrase things in the future so as to try not to unintentionally offend anyone.
As to your other question...I think its because when someone agrees with you, they just nod their head instead of posting a "ditto" post just to show they have the same train of thought. Now if someone dosen't agree or has a different take on something they will be quick to point out their side (because silence seems to indicate agreement). If the discussion can remain civil and productive though I guess relies upon the posters being sensible and mature enough to keep level heads.
I guess it'a the same problem with reading digital media/. You really can't translate tone. Thanks for the clear up Sepsis. Good gaming
I dislike Eberron. I'd like to see dark sun & greyhawk and even ravenloft. I like forgotten realms but I much prefer greyhwak's Gods. ;)
Thats one aspect where i prefer forgotten realms, might just be because ive read more on the FR dieties then i did on the grey hawk ones though.
I'm the opposite of those who want all the backstory considered canon. I'd rather have a reimagined Greyhawk/Dragonlance/Dark Sun that has no ties to previous metaplot, untethered from the mountains of garbage that has come before.
I think one issue is whether they want to invalidate all the novels out there. With Dragonlance, and DS to a lesser extent, there are a bunch of official stories that define the canon of the setting. It would be a bit of a risk on WotC's part to make a campaign setting that ends up being different from the related novels bearing the same name. With FR im sure they would have loved to just reboot the setting but continuity with a parallel product (novels) was likely an important consideration and thus we wound up with an apocalypse that was compatible with existing canon.
I’m more of a traditionalist. If they want to add additional fluff that’s fine but I have played so many campaigns in Greyhawk I have a feel for the world and its fluff. If they want to make something totally new then that’s fine but call it something else.
Id rather have it reimagined, ie keep some of the core conciets and places but change it in a lot of ways. I.E make less human centric to start with. I doubt Id be interested unless they do that. I dont want to game in a world thats 90% or more human.
I'm the opposite of those who want all the backstory considered canon. I'd rather have a reimagined Greyhawk/Dragonlance/Dark Sun that has no ties to previous metaplot, untethered from the mountains of garbage that has come before.
I can't understand that point of few at all. This "garbage" IS the setting. Every setting is defined through it's specific "garbage" otherwise everything would be bland standard D&D and no seperate setting at all.
I can't understand that point of few at all. This "garbage" IS the setting. Every setting is defined through it's specific "garbage" otherwise everything would be bland standard D&D and no seperate setting at all.
Sometimes especially with an old setting you can take the core of it and change a lot of stuff keep it true to the themes of the setting, but change a few things here and there to make it more interesting to new players.
I can't understand that point of few at all. This "garbage" IS the setting. Every setting is defined through it's specific "garbage" otherwise everything would be bland standard D&D and no seperate setting at all.
I don't see it as getting rid of the distinctions of a setting at all. Here's an example of what I'm talking about: If I were to publish or buy a setting for the Wheel of Time, I would prefer the book to describe the world as it is before the events of The Eye of the World, rather than writing the setting as it exists after Winter's Heart or Crossroads of Twilight. The latter assumes that I have read all the books about the setting, and that's a huge barrier to entry for potential new fans. I'm guessing here, but I assume that going by page count, Dragonlance's barrier to entry rivals my hypothetical Wheel of Time setting book.
Id rather have it reimagined, ie keep some of the core conciets and places but change it in a lot of ways. I.E make less human centric to start with. I doubt Id be interested unless they do that. I dont want to game in a world thats 90% or more human.
They can change the populations easy but Greyhawk is not 90% human IMO. It is human dominated.
They can change the populations easy but Greyhawk is not 90% human IMO. It is human dominated.
Yeah and for me to like it that would have to change, Id love to see a narnia type setting where humans are a distinct minority because in 3.5 I was sick of seeing parties made up of mostly humans. Personally I like my fantasy to be a little more fantastical at times. Grey Hawk what I know of it seems too much like medival europe with a little magic thrown in, but like I said I dont know a lot about it.
The bolded parts above are the best selling points. Bigby, Melf, and Iuz are still generally considered to be Greyhawk-specific, so any campaign setting would have to give good attention to the Circle of Eight and other prominent NPCs.
If memory serves me correctly, Iuz didn't fair so well in Die Vecna Die! 3 Brand-crossover module. (Greyhawk, Planescape, and Ravenloft).
One reason we don't see Tenser, Leomund, Mordenkaid, and etc spells either.
Greyhawk is human centric - Nope. It requires explication to understand what was taking place. The WoG was written from a human perspective. The voice of the text is Pluffet Smedger, a human historian who is looking back to a lost world. The world back then is largely unknown now, even moreso when humans from the Flanaess aren't directly involved. This is not to say that humans are the center of everything, but it does cleverly create intentional storyteller bias "These are my ancestors and we are here today." In other words, to Pluffet Smedger they're the center of his studies.
Greyhawk is generic fantasy - What does that even mean? You mean it has dungeons and dragons? Or maybe elves and dwarves? What about ancient war machines and mechanical titans, lost cities of the gods, or time traveling pistol wielding wizards? The fringe fantasy of Greyhawk is the legends that are unique, a hallmark of the setting. Greyhawk was never fully invested in Vancian magic as say Eberron or FR. But Greyhawk does seem to have the "Empire of the East" or "Book of Lost Swords" backstory where ancient warmachines (M1 Abrams) are "lost magic." There's a slight oWoD MtA feel that magic and technology do not coexist in the same realm, like matter and anti-matter. It was fringe enough to be ignored but existed in modules and fluff none-the-less and many DMs ran with it. To say there is D&D and no Greyhawk would be a lie. It's not generic, it's just what D&D is made of. WotC had to simply accept that Bigby and Mordenkainen are archtypal wizards in ways that Elminster or Raistlin aren't. They are, but they're Greyhawk wizards. That world is their story and it deserves a telling.
Greyhawk is Living Greyhawk - Certainly not. Dropping LG fluff via rewind is a much needed change. People said the same for Battlestar Galactica. Or the Ultimates. People tend to forget that Greyhawk is a collaborative world. It's a campaign setting first, as opposed to FR or DL which are novelist settings first. The canon of Greyhawk was written with dice, not word processors. Gygax ran a Greyhawk campaign and Kuntz co-DMed, Arneson ran a Blackmoor campaign, Lakofka did a Lendore Isles campaign; they all merged into Greyhawk. The problem with post 1983 is they created a metaplot (From the Ashes) which pigeonholed every story thereafter. Metaplot killed the original design of Greyhawk because now all DM plots must choose to either ignore or incorporate a single event. Prior to this there were literally few GH campaigns that were similar. Eberron campaigns tend to either explore the Mournland or Xendrick, or work within or around the Last War. I've played in several, with different DMs. These plots appear with stale regularity. FR is suffering from the same with the Spell-scarred (Greenwood's answer to Dragonmarks). That said, Greyhawk needs to return to a world of vastly different nations (deeper lines need to be drawn in the Barbarian lands of the icy north) where a single plot doesn't exist to intertwine them all. Using the LG and "From the Ashes" fluff as possibilities to an uncertain future or casual references of things to come would be an excellent primer, but as it stands they replaced intrigue with a pair of brass knuckles.
Greyhawk is built with dice - From the beginning the World of Greyhawk was conceived by the actions of players and DMs alike. They were professional players, among the best, and their actions live on in every D&D since. The lifeblood of Greyhawk was the module. Every campaign setting except GH will find more supplements to explain the nit-noid history of the world. Greyhawk doesn't have DMPCs and Mary-Sues solving all of the problems. Read any of the sparse fluff and it often implies to the outcome of an out of date module saying, "A group of adventurers..." If WotC would rewind Greyhawk they need to support it with solid modules and adventures to allow the DM and players to make it their own, and not live under the shadow of a metaplot or some novelist's Mary-Sue.
Greyhawk is adventure and intrigue - This commandment was lost somewhere during the dark days of TSR and was never rediscovered. The early days of Greyhawk allowed DMs to have dozens secret societies to choose from - Baklunish Assassins, Scarlet Brotherhood spies, Agents of Iuz, follows of the mysterious Egg, cultists of the Temple of Elemental Evil, Slavelords, and so on. These were supported by a central tenet that no single event or idea was given precedence over another. Anyone who picked up the 1983 boxed set (not to mention the Hardcover) didn't feel as if the "Temple of Elemental Evil" story line was less important than "Against the Giants/Descend into the Depths" story line. Why? Because neither was considered a single defining metaplot of the setting. Nor could the "Tomb of Horrors" considered a metaplot, nor "The City of the Gods" which is also mentioned. Despite the lack of heavy-handed story arcs each contributed to the setting as either a piece of fluff or an a major story. It became a major story because the DM and players rolled their dice. Their existence wasn't clearly defined until the dice were rolled which creates intrigue in and of itself. In essense, nobody in the world knows until the DM runs the module and the players adventure.
Snip
Nice post.
I only take issue with somehow lumping Eberron into the metaplot problem, as Eberron doesn't have any metaplot - it's all setup. The Mournland and Xen'drik are magically screwed up places, but it's up to the DM to decide the what and how for most of either, if he/she feels so inclined to set the game in those areas.
Nice post.
I only take issue with somehow lumping Eberron into the metaplot problem, as Eberron doesn't have any metaplot - it's all setup. The Mournland and Xen'drik are magically screwed up places, but it's up to the DM to decide the what and how for most of either, if he/she feels so inclined to set the game in those areas.
I wish but they've explained how Cyre was Destroyed and why Xendrik is a vast jungle. Until WotC did that our games were a bit different. Truename magic destroyed Cyre, not an ancient Xendrik weapon used by the Giants against the Dal Quor - The Tales of the Last War. This sort of canon limits how players and DMs can look at a situation. As I said, they must choose to ignore it rather than possessing unfettered creative license. It does affect the play of the game because it often creates confusion as canon must be ignored which often leaves holes that are counter-intuitive to players and DMs. These issues can be difficult to resolve in Roleplay heavy campaigns. We chose to ignore it, continue on with Truename magic as the cause. The fluff seemed a better fit to us as Truename magic could change the nature of giants and elementals alike, something existing magic was incapable of. Also, the DM didn't allow Truenamers giving it an "NPC Only" status.
This is what I meant by being required to ignore the metaplot.
I wish but they've explained how Cyre was Destroyed and why Xendrik is a vast jungle. Until WotC did that our games were a bit different. Truename magic destroyed Cyre, not an ancient Xendrik weapon used by the Giants against the Dal Quor - The Tales of the Last War. This sort of canon limits how players and DMs can look at a situation. As I said, they must choose to ignore it rather than possessing unfettered creative license. It does affect the play of the game because it often creates confusion as canon must be ignored which often leaves holes that are counter-intuitive to players and DMs. These issues can be difficult to resolve in Roleplay heavy campaigns. We chose to ignore it, continue on with Truename magic as the cause. The fluff seemed a better fit to us as Truename magic could change the nature of giants and elementals alike, something existing magic was incapable of. Also, the DM didn't allow Truenamers giving it an "NPC Only" status.
This is what I meant by being required to ignore the metaplot.
Umm Eberron novels aren't considered canon, even the ones by Keith Baker(the creator of the setting). So you don't have to ignore canon, you have to ignore a parallel version of Eerron which may or may not have events unfold in the same way.
Umm Eberron novels aren't considered canon, even the ones by Keith Baker(the creator of the setting). So you don't have to ignore canon, you have to ignore a parallel version of Eerron which may or may not have events unfold in the same way.
thats why eberron blows chunks from both ends....... and a dead world
What I have noticed is, that great fantasy novels make poor games (too bound by our preconconceptions and desires) whereas great games make poor novels (compare the dialogue and language of any TSR or WOTC novel to that of Tolkien or Martin).
If I can adventure in Eberron and have nothing but dice and roleplaying affect the story, then I say, Bring it on.
Therefore, I hope they will free Greyhawk from its accretions also.
Blows chunks? A campaign world free from the effects of hack house writers churning out terrible fantasy novels? Sounds great to me.
What I have noticed is, that great fantasy novels make poor games (too bound by our preconconceptions and desires) whereas great games make poor novels (compare the dialogue and language of any TSR or WOTC novel to that of Tolkien or Martin).
If I can adventure in Eberron and have nothing but dice and roleplaying affect the story, then I say, Bring it on.
Therefore, I hope they will free Greyhawk from its accretions also.
The ONLY reason that I don't play DDO is the fact that it is Eberron. Even though it is going to F2P I still won't waste my time on that setting. I would rather wait for a new setting or play NWN or NWN2 instead. I totally enjoyed what Gygax and Estes wrote. I even found the novelizations of Emerson, Reid, and Kidd to be quite enjoyable in the Greyhawk setting. For the Realms I have to admit I haven't found a book that I have read that I didn't enjoy. With that said the War of the Spider Queen was difficult since it continued the story but had a different captain at the helm of the ship. Still very pleasant but it took something to get use to. I'm not even going to say how great the Dragonlance Saga is.
I would have no problem and would actually prefer that they didn't even continue with the POS that Eberron is.
I can't understand that point of few at all. This "garbage" IS the setting. Every setting is defined through it's specific "garbage" otherwise everything would be bland standard D&D and no seperate setting at all.
OK... Didn't Gygax destroy the world in the last "Greyhawk" book he wrote. (Published by someone other than TSR/Wizards) I think that particular part is gonna be excluded.
OK... Didn't Gygax destroy the world in the last "Greyhawk" book he wrote. (Published by someone other than TSR/Wizards) I think that particular part is gonna be excluded.
Yep, whole multiverse falls to Tharizdun, who (if Father Time is to be believed) eventually gets obliterated by Lord Entropy when it eats the whole cosmos. But it's all okay, because or heroes get reincarnated in the next multiverse over, and in better life circumstances to boot.
Insanely lame ending, and it richly deserves to be ignored.
I like the Eberron campaign, but it is something of an change from the normal D&D play.
Completely off-topic, unexplained yet vehement Eberron hate makes me giggle for some reason.
Agreed :D
Completely off-topic, unexplained yet vehement Eberron hate makes me giggle for some reason.
yeah, well what if it cant be put into words???
Can I see a place for it in the available niches awiting to be filled by WotC? I dunno
Can it turn a profit? I dunno
Which is sad, since those two questions, to me, speak of whether or not it'll happen.
Still, I agree with an above poster; best way to pay tribute to Gary Gygax is to just play the game, get together with friends, and have a good time slaying dragons.
Of course, I paid tribute to him in my own way... my little Tomb of Horrors conversion in my sig =P Which I'm still constantly tweaking to try and get to perfection, but anyway...
Yeah, I wouldn't mind seeing Greyhawk.
Completely off-topic, unexplained yet vehement Eberron hate makes me giggle for some reason.
As I was planning my Eberron campaign today, I realized that one scene I was writing up was effectively the party standing on the top of a speeding train, punching Nazis off of it Indiana Jones style into throngs of undead and warforged, Cyre exploding in the distance.
In light of that... ANY sort of hate of such awesomeness makes me laugh =P
yeah, well what if [it] cant be put into words???
I really don't like it either, yes, without a beer in my hand, find talking about my problems with it to be difficult.
But, I will be honest, I really hope they release settings like Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Planescape, or Spelljammer first.
I find it funny that people keep mentioning those last three when they have been folded into core and it's been said that they will not be their own setting. Dark Sun's a possibility.
I mean, really, what makes Grayhawk unique from the generic run of the mill European fantasy (serious question)? If you want a setting made, that is the pitch you should be considering. Because really, that is the pitch which will get a setting made.
Well, we got Forgotten Realms. I wonder what pitch that got. Just as generic, and less interesting to boot.
Well, we got Forgotten Realms. I wonder what pitch that got. Just as generic, and less interesting to boot.
Well, it was one of two campaign settings to get published support in 3e, and nearly half of all the rules supplements of 3e were FR supplements. The FR novels were also still actually in print.
I don't care for FR, but I do understand why they kept it around.
Well, we got Forgotten Realms. I wonder what pitch that got.
"Either we release the books now and get flamed by the fans now. Or we wait, get flamed by them later, and have a group of FR fans waiting on our front lawns with torches. So, release it now, and spare our front lawns."
Well, it was one of two campaign settings to get published support in 3e, and nearly half of all the rules supplements of 3e were FR supplements. The FR novels were also still actually in print.
I don't care for FR, but I do understand why they kept it around.
Greyhawk was the Core setting in 3e. So technically, everything published in 3e that wasn't specific to a setting was Greyhawk. Most of the supplements had Greyhawk flavored Prestige Classes, etc. Not to mention the classic Bigby, Mordenkainen, Tenser, Rary, etc. spells.
FRs advantage is that they were actively developing it through novels which sell well. Which was another reason I dislike the FR. It's overdeveloped. The Spellplague has helped that tremendously, at least until they overdevelop it again and have to come up with another cataclysm. :D
Greyhawk was the Core setting in 3e. So technically, everything published in 3e that wasn't specific to a setting was Greyhawk. Most of the supplements had Greyhawk flavored Prestige Classes, etc. Not to mention the classic Bigby, Mordenkainen, Tenser, Rary, etc. spells.
FRs advantage is that they were actively developing it through novels which sell well. Which was another reason I dislike the FR. It's overdeveloped. The Spellplague has helped that tremendously, at least until they overdevelop it again and have to come up with another cataclysm. :D
Well this time the novels are not canon (thank god) I dont think a setting tied to novels is a good idea I like the concept of Ebaron never been able to play in it but I like the concept.
Well this time the novels are not canon (thank god)
Where'd you hear that at? That doesn't make much sense. In the Living Forgotten Realms campaign the RPGA is running right now, all mod plots have to get green lighted by the FR development team to make sure nothing in the mods steps on the toes of what is going on in the books or is planned for future books because the LFR mods are canon.
That wouldn't make any sense if the novels aren't canon. I don't think you're right on that.
Dragon9 is correct, as much as I would like it be otherwise, novels are canon in FR.
Bel
Hopefully if a setting does well it might encourage some novels. (not necessarily canon)
Dragon9 is correct, as much as I would like it be otherwise, novels are canon in FR.
Bel
Maybe this is my inner Eberron coming out, but I cannot imagine playing a campaign setting where anything besides the core rulebooks is 'canon' in my game, and I should therefore be expected to know it...
Mostly because... well...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Forgotten_Realms_novels
Maybe this is my inner Eberron coming out, but I cannot imagine playing a campaign setting where anything besides the core rulebooks is 'canon' in my game, and I should therefore be expected to know it...
Mostly because... well...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Forgotten_Realms_novels
Yeah same here. But then I dont play in living campaigns either.
That said, yeah, I would really like to see Greyhawk officially supported again. It has its pros and cons, but I've spent most of my gaming years in it (despite having started with 3.5) and I would very much like to see some life breathed into it. My 4E tabletop game is set in Greyhawk (Keoland) as well.
I play on a 3.5 board that uses Greyhawk as default setting and I don't think even the re-release could make it finally make the leap to 4th edition.
Maybe this is my inner Eberron coming out, but I cannot imagine playing a campaign setting where anything besides the core rulebooks is 'canon' in my game, and I should therefore be expected to know it...
Mostly because... well...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Forgotten_Realms_novels
Holy smokes! I knew there was a reason that FR wasn't for me.
someone in another thread said that grey hawk was very much like medival europe with magic, if thats true Ill pass on it. Im sick of settings that are based around medival europe.
Someone on another thread is as dense as day-old poundcake.
Someone on another thread is as dense as day-old poundcake.
That "someone" is in all likelyhood myself. I have always found the Flaneass to be very much inspired by medieval Europe. What makes you think it is not?
I mean, game mechanics do not change because of historical source or geography. The only difference in whether the setting is medieval europe or not is whether it has thatched roofs and religious institutions being stronger than 'worldy' rulers.
Does Greyhawk have thatched roofs, or does Eberron or maybe FR, and does it plant wheat or rice? Up to the individual, I say.
...What I have noticed is, that great fantasy novels make poor games (too bound by our preconconceptions and desires) whereas great games make poor novels (compare the dialogue and language of any TSR or WOTC novel to that of Tolkien or Martin)...
I have a slight disagreement here. While it is very true that most TSR/WotC "novel" writers are horrible at the task (most should stick to writing supplements), you still have writers such as Raymond E. Feist who's world of Midkemia and most of his main characters came from his D&D games from his college days.
So while the actual fluff and mechanics of D&D may make lousy choices for source material for novels, the game can be an incredible source of inspiration for those with a real talent for telling narratives.
And I do agree that campaign settings need to be just that...settings. We should be given arenas to build our own adventures in, not theaters where we have to act out a preformatted script of events.
Bring back the Flanaess, the entire pantheon, characters ,one of the early world. Bring me back to the begining...
Not just revisiting prestigious places under the anonymat of the no mans land
Hommlett, The moathouse ..The Giants
But to stand up from the ashes still smoking, and burn again in the name of...
MAY GREYHAWK SEE A RESSURECTION !!!!
That "someone" is in all likelyhood myself. I have always found the Flaneass to be very much inspired by medieval Europe. What makes you think it is not?
Eh then Ill probably stay away from it then. Kinda sick of the whole European flavour of fantasy.
Prior to 4e, I thought that Dungeon & Dragon had a good Greyhawk / non-Greyhawk mix, although I would expect the other game worlds to get more attention in 4e.
The biggest hurdles are Tieflings and Dragonborn, but those are easy enough to include for us old-timers.
Tieflings are the children and grandchildren (and ongoing descendants) of the former rulers of the Horned Society, fallen to the might of Iuz's Empire.
Dragonborn arose during 3.5, as heroic mortals who pledged themselves to Bahmut and were transformed. Just make the ruling that after a time, Bahamut returned their libidos and fertility to his sworn champions, changing them into a rare but viable species.
Deva? Deva can be the reincarnations of the Astral, Movanic, and Monadic devas who aided Oerth's heroes in stopping Tharizdun from utterly destroying the Multiverse (although the Great Ring was itself lost, as well as the previous arrangement of the Inner Planes).
And the Goliaths? While not a facet of old-school Greyhawk, Half-Ogres are, and all you have to do is change the name of the race, and voila!
But to make it interesting...Im sick of settings...
No, for specifically you to like this setting, they'd have to change it.
I know you're an incredibly (and I do mean incredibly) vocal naysayer of certain campaign settings, but that's still just one copy of a product that may come out.Honestly, I think most people disregard the racial distribution percentages when creating characters or adventures.
No, for specifically you to like this setting, they'd have to change it.
Honestly, I think most people disregard the racial distribution percentages when creating characters or adventures.
Thats true Id just love to see a world that isnt predominantly human. I honestly dont know enough about grey hawk to like it or not all i know is it was the asumed setting of 3.5 and the gods in the 3.5 book seemed kinda bland. On grey hawk ill keep an open mind but Id like a setting with a more fantastical feel to it. I mean what kind of fantastic locations does grey hawk have? Does it have any cultural influence that isnt european in nature?
IIRC There was an area that had Middle-Eastern influences. Can somebody who's familiar with Greyhawk verify this?
That would be neat.
IIRC There was an area that had Middle-Eastern influences. Can somebody who's familiar with Greyhawk verify this?
I'd rather have Al Qadim than Greyhawk's Middle East.
though it does make me wonder why Forgotten Realms had to be so severely altered just to add a few new races - -
Because in FR there is a Canon, and every novel ever published for FR is Canon. And every novel published under an edition explicitly uses the roleplaying game mechanics as exposition in the novel. And people who are invested in the Canon* will not brook any hinted change without wailing and screaming and gnashing of teeth. If that secret door isn't there in the Dalelands where Book 34 of the Drizzt Chronicles Part Seven said it was, there's going to be hell to pay.
It's like the story of New Coke. A lot of people liked New Coke, but a few people who were personally offended that Coca-Cola Corporation would even think about changing the Coke Taste, even as an optional alternative, yelled and screamed and gnashed teeth and changed public opinion.
Eberron doesn't have an official Post-Setting-Book Timeline or Canon novels, and so 4e Eberron was less of a deal. It was more like going back to the Grey Box of FR. Personally I think that's the best way to handle re-releases of vintage settings, rather than having to both keep all the Canon and also make it invisible to people who hate the Canon.
*I am, in fact, anti-Canon in all its forms relating to RPG Campaign Settings.
I'd love to see Greyhawk for 4th Edition. Unfortunately, the only discussions on Greyhawk fansites seem to vacillate between bemoaning WotC's lack of support to uttering dire warnings that they'd better not DARE touch their beloved Greyhawk. That doesn't seem like a productive attitude to me. I think the Eberron Campaign guide proves that it IS possible for WotC to update a setting without turning it completely upside down - - though it does make me wonder why Forgotten Realms had to be so severely altered just to add a few new races - -
Forgotten Realms was a testbed as well, to see to what extent revision of a setting would be accepted by the fans. I think what they learned was that that level of revision is the absolute maximum safe amount of changes to be made to a setting at one time; any more than that could have been a critical meltdown of the fanbase.
That said, it wasn't chosen for that role arbitrarily; FR was the setting most demanded by fans, so it had to come first. It was also a setting in need of major changes in order to become "player friendly", as well as to attract new fans. After all that had to happen, explaining where Dragonborn come from was small beans.
As for Greyhawk, I think you're right about the fandom zeitgeist and how unhelpful it is. That said, Greyhawk has acquired a reputation as a sort of "old fuddy-duddy" setting, and it might serve it well to change as little as possible to fulfill that role for at least another decade. This will position it to support a "greying" fanbase as the setting of a niche hobby, kinda like model trains. (Let me know if that didn't make any sense. I kinda vomited words there.)
On grey hawk ill keep an open mind but Id like a setting with a more fantastical feel to it. I mean what kind of fantastic locations does grey hawk have?
This is kinda hard, as many of Greyhawk's "cool things" have been taken and plopped down in the default world. There's Zagyg's "Castle Greyhawk" itself. Blackmoor's "City of the Gods," the world-falling "Isle of Dread," the "Tomb of Horrors," and the infamous "Temple of Elemental Evil."
Really, with how much of Greyhawk has been absorbed into the core D&D rules (love how Invokers both get the 'Rain of Colorless Fire' and 'Invoked Devastation' :D ), one could probably just use the old campaign setting, figure out what Channel Divinity feats fit which Greyhawk deity, and go from there. The more I think about it, the more I want to do just that.
As for Greyhawk, I think you're right about the fandom zeitgeist and how unhelpful it is. That said, Greyhawk has acquired a reputation as a sort of "old fuddy-duddy" setting, and it might serve it well to change as little as possible to fulfill that role for at least another decade. This will position it to support a "greying" fanbase as the setting of a niche hobby, kinda like model trains. (Let me know if that didn't make any sense. I kinda vomited words there.)
Yes, this is why I'm not terribly in favour of releasing it as a new 4e setting but rather producing some articles in Dungeon & Dragon. The fan base is there - we don't really want them to monkey with the setting to the level of FR. Things like region-specific backgrounds, deity-specific domains, articles with background on locations for the odd 4e module, 4e conversions of some of the most iconic modules (we have already had the Moathouse and Hommlet), and 4e sample conversions of established npcs would be welcome. A brief adventure path or side trek adventure could be quite cool too.
I'd love to see Greyhawk for 4th Edition. Unfortunately, the only discussions on Greyhawk fansites seem to vacillate between bemoaning WotC's lack of support to uttering dire warnings that they'd better not DARE touch their beloved Greyhawk. That doesn't seem like a productive attitude to me. I think the Eberron Campaign guide proves that it IS possible for WotC to update a setting without turning it completely upside down - - though it does make me wonder why Forgotten Realms had to be so severely altered just to add a few new races - -
Something else that I don't believe that has been mentioned yet, is that the writers were complaining. From what I've read, the authors for FR were complaining to WotC that there was just too much lore established in the other novels and source books for them to keep it all straight while writing, so they wiped a blank spot in the lore to make it easier for the novelists.
Because in FR there is a Canon, and every novel ever published for FR is Canon. And every novel published under an edition explicitly uses the roleplaying game mechanics as exposition in the novel. And people who are invested in the Canon* will not brook any hinted change without wailing and screaming and gnashing of teeth. If that secret door isn't there in the Dalelands where Book 34 of the Drizzt Chronicles Part Seven said it was, there's going to be hell to pay.
And it's more than that too. The devs stated that the previous Realms, through 1st-3rd edition, had pretty much had every square inch of the continent developed to the point where it was getting difficult to find places for new stories. So they had to do a massive reset to essentially wipe the slate clean andalso to leave lots of room for players to get in and deal with the new Realms.
This was in one of the design and development articles in Dragon.
...Really, with how much of Greyhawk has been absorbed into the core D&D rules (love how Invokers both get the 'Rain of Colorless Fire' and 'Invoked Devastation' :D ), one could probably just use the old campaign setting, figure out what Channel Divinity feats fit which Greyhawk deity, and go from there. The more I think about it, the more I want to do just that.
I can tell you from expierence it works great. We really don't need an "official" 4e Greyhawk, by using the existing fluff and maps with the 4e rules you get a great setting with heaps of possibilities.
Although I wouldn't mind if WotC revised their "Expedition to..." adventures and gave us 4e versions of the best classic Modules (yet again...
). I would buy a 4e "Temple of Elemental Evil" adventure (and a 4e Ravenloft adventure...the one with Strahd...not the whole setting), but thats another topic altogether.I can tell you from expierence it works great. We really don't need an "official" 4e Greyhawk, by using the existing fluff and maps with the 4e rules you get a great setting with heaps of possibilities.
Good to hear! I'll go to work on those Channel Divinity feats, then...
Although I wouldn't mind if WotC revised their "Expedition to..." adventures and gave us 4e versions of the best classic Modules (yet again...
I hear ya on these. 4e ToEE & Ravenloft modules would be kickass!
Does it have any cultural influence that isnt european in nature?
In no particular order or concern for completeness, I find cultural influences reminiscent of such non-European folks as: Arabians, Turks, 500 Nations, Bantu, Aztecs, Mongols, white supremists, Roma, Carribean pirates, Persians, and the antebellum American South.
The only ones that feel pastiche are the Olman, which copy the Aztecs far too closely for my tastes.
Yes, this is why I'm not terribly in favour of releasing it as a new 4e setting but rather producing some articles in Dungeon & Dragon. The fan base is there - we don't really want them to monkey with the setting to the level of FR. Things like region-specific backgrounds, deity-specific domains, articles with background on locations for the odd 4e module, 4e conversions of some of the most iconic modules (we have already had the Moathouse and Hommlet), and 4e sample conversions of established npcs would be welcome. A brief adventure path or side trek adventure could be quite cool too.
Personally, I have no desire for such things as "region-specific backgrounds, deity-specific domains, articles with background on locations for the odd 4e module, 4e conversions of some of the most iconic modules (we have already had the Moathouse and Hommlet), and 4e sample conversions of established npcs." Additionally, I have no desire for another gazetteer that basically rehashes the '83 boxed set, From the Ashes, and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer.
I would be most interested in WotC turning Greyhawk upside down to see what would shake out. On the other hand, I am enough of a grognard to wince and bite my tongue at the thought of Greyhawk being sullied in such manner.
In no particular order or concern for completeness, I find cultural influences reminiscent of such non-European folks as: Arabians, Turks, 500 Nations, Bantu, Aztecs, Mongols, white supremists, Roma, Carribean pirates, Persians, and the antebellum American South.
The only ones that feel pastiche are the Olman, which copy the Aztecs far too closely for my tastes.
kool if it has influences from those then if they make it I will at least look at it.
I would be most interested in WotC turning Greyhawk upside down to see what would shake out. On the other hand, I am enough of a grognard to wince and bite my tongue at the thought of Greyhawk being sullied in such manner.
Gods no! Biting your tongue isn't enough. Somebody cut it out quickly! And take away your keyboard too!
My problem is what would they put in the player's guide?
So far each player's guide has new races and a new class.
What race could you put in Greyhawk? What class?
Or if they did put some in, would it just be made from whole cloth, like the swordmage? Or would the swordmage be an inspiration, being a version of fighter/magic-user?
Looking back through some of the old books, the various knightly orders do get a bit of mention. Knight as a class?
I don't think Valley Elves would be unique enough for a race...
What race could you put in Greyhawk? What class?
I'd like if they get some depth to classic monsters as playable races. Gnolls and kobolds come to mind.
I think you nailed it with class, Knight/Cavalier would be cool. With expanded mount rules. I think if they keep a 'classic 1st ed' feel though they're on the right track.
Another option would be to expand the map (maybe double it's size) so that you can incorporate the Dragonborn and other new stuff and make the world more versatile for DMs.
It also had some variant halflings.
Classes: I could see the potential for a lot of PPs. Varying knightly order PPs (Knights of Veluna, of the Hart, etc.) Deity specific PPs, etc. Possibly new buolds to classes. For example, Raoan Paladins typically only wore chainmail and didn't carry shields. So a varying Paladin build for that could be done. Not likely, but an idea.
It, again, suffers from the "every other setting pulled from it" so there aren't really any new classes. Probably just variations.
I trust if they bring it out we will see something. Maybe a lot of Bigby et. al. spells.
I would love to see a Greyhawk setting for 4E.
My problem is what would they put in the player's guide?
So far each player's guide has new races and a new class.
What race could you put in Greyhawk? What class?
HALF-OGRES
Classes are a little tougher...They're already putting the Monk and the Psion in PHB-3, so maybe Necromancers
Hmm. Just thought, that if the illusionist doesn't appear elsewhere, it would fit in Greyhawk.
doesnt almost everything including lasers fit in grey hawk though its not a matter of what fits its a matter of whats unique to the setting.
What race could you put in Greyhawk? What class?
Xvarts and Assassins.
There's also those furry guys in Blackmoor. Quags?
Hmm. Just thought, that if the illusionist doesn't appear elsewhere, it would fit in Greyhawk.
Except that the Illusionist is simply a Wizard with more Illusion/Phantasm spells than other spells, and has already been covered in Dragon. Unless you want them to publish a Greyhawk setting book with nothing but reprinted material, They'd have to figure out how to expand the list of Illusion based spells beyond what they already have.
Your thinking in 3rd edition terms, were all the spells were grouped together separately from the classes. It isn't like that anymore.
The Illusionist, still a possibility in my mind, is more than shadow/phantasmal illusions and could be more than a spell selection for the wizard.
Your thinking in 3rd edition terms, were all the spells were grouped together separately from the classes. It isn't like that anymore.
Actually, I was referring more to 1st edition AD&D, where the Illusionist was a sub-class of Wizard, which is what we would thematically be returning to if the Illusionist made it's return as a separate class from the Wizard.
Or do you think we should go even further back, to Basic, where Elves were a character class all their own and all elves were Fighter/Magic-Users?
My point about Illusionist is this: IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. Making a separate class would just be retreading old ground. The article in Dragon 364 is already there. Do you really feel the need to make the designers completely build a custom class to do what has already been published???
Or do you think we should go even further back, to Basic, where Elves were a character class all their own and all elves were Fighter/Magic-Users?
These days, "Fighter/Magic-User Elves" would be Eladrin. The Elves themselves would now be Ranger/Druids. :P
Actually, I was referring more to 1st edition AD&D, where the Illusionist was a sub-class of Wizard, which is what we would thematically be returning to if the Illusionist made it's return as a separate class from the Wizard.
Or do you think we should go even further back, to Basic, where Elves were a character class all their own and all elves were Fighter/Magic-Users?
My point about Illusionist is this: IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. Making a separate class would just be retreading old ground. The article in Dragon 364 is already there. Do you really feel the need to make the designers completely build a custom class to do what has already been published???
A few spells does not make the whole of a class, nor does it exclude the possibility, specially since the Illusionist was mentioned as a possible class a while ago as a Shadow Power source class.
I am so glad that the school specialization that was in the previous edition has been nixed. It was poorly executed and watered down from what was in 2nd edition. I think having those schools in separate classes instead is an exciting possibility.
Side note, I want the class "Magic-User" back... :D
Arcane powers has the illusion wizard build in it.
A few spells does not make the whole of a class, nor does it exclude the possibility, specially since the Illusionist was mentioned as a possible class a while ago as a Shadow Power source class.
I am so glad that the school specialization that was in the previous edition has been nixed. It was poorly executed and watered down from what was in 2nd edition. I think having those schools in separate classes instead is an exciting possibility.
A few spells does not make the whole of a class, nor does it exclude the possibility, specially since the Illusionist was mentioned as a possible class a while ago as a Shadow Power source class.
I am so glad that the school specialization that was in the previous edition has been nixed. It was poorly executed and watered down from what was in 2nd edition. I think having those schools in separate classes instead is an exciting possibility.
doubt it. The wizard has enough illusion powers as well as summoning powers.
A few spells does not make the whole of a class, nor does it exclude the possibility, specially since the Illusionist was mentioned as a possible class a while ago as a Shadow Power source class.
I am so glad that the school specialization that was in the previous edition has been nixed. It was poorly executed and watered down from what was in 2nd edition. I think having those schools in separate classes instead is an exciting possibility.
They might make a shadow class that utilises illusions, but I doubt they'd call it the illusionist now. Too much chance for confusion ("Are you playing a wizard with the illusionist build or an illusionist illusionist?")
They might make a shadow class that utilises illusions, but I doubt they'd call it the illusionist now. Too much chance for confusion ("Are you playing a wizard with the illusionist build or an illusionist illusionist?")
"Build"
I hate this concept, and despise the rise of this particular practice in the previous edition. It is power gaming at it's worst, if your not playing this "Build" then you shouldn't be playing the class.
The only confusion would be if the class used the same "spells" as the wizards. This edition is as such that that won't be the case. If another name is used, it most likely won't be a long one with two words like "Shadowcaster" like it was previously. I still hold out hope for a Transmuter and the Necromancer.
"Build"
I hate this concept, and despise the rise of this particular practice in the previous edition. It is power gaming at it's worst, if your not playing this "Build" then you shouldn't be playing the class.
The only confusion would be if the class used the same "spells" as the wizards. This edition is as such that that won't be the case. If another name is used, it most likely won't be a long one with two words like "Shadowcaster" like it was previously. I still hold out hope for a Transmuter and the Necromancer.
um why do you hate build it just refers to specific kind of that class. So far every build for every class is viable.
um why do you hate build it just refers to specific kind of that class. So far every build for every class is viable.
For this edition, it is like Wizards wanted to have the tree branch like system, like Diablo skills, but the freedom to pick and choose. It makes the Warlock into a directed class, you take this that goes with your pact or your screwed, but the other classes sorta has a choice on what to do, but not really.
It is a power creep "build" mentality, but hampered by "balance" that the classes now have inherent within the structure of their design.
When I first heard about the wizard being able to use a wand instead of using components, I was hoping for something that was akin to Harry Potter, flinging magic around and using it as their version of a sword.
What we got is a choice of implements, and no real use unless you spend what few resources you get for a magic one.
That is what I grit my teeth, not that the "builds" are there, but that they have creeped into the very fabric of this new edition instead of being weeded out. The way it looks to me, it is a way to limit the classes so that one or the other of a particular class can be different and have their "specialties," like the Ranger having to choose Range or TWF.
For this edition, it is like Wizards wanted to have the tree branch like system, like Diablo skills, but the freedom to pick and choose. It makes the Warlock into a directed class, you take this that goes with your pact or your screwed, but the other classes sorta has a choice on what to do, but not really.
It is a power creep "build" mentality, but hampered by "balance" that the classes now have inherent within the structure of their design.
When I first heard about the wizard being able to use a wand instead of using components, I was hoping for something that was akin to Harry Potter, flinging magic around and using it as their version of a sword.
What we got is a choice of implements, and no real use unless you spend what few resources you get for a magic one.
That is what I grit my teeth, not that the "builds" are there, but that they have creeped into the very fabric of this new edition instead of being weeded out. The way it looks to me, it is a way to limit the classes so that one or the other of a particular class can be different and have their "specialties," like the Ranger having to choose Range or TWF.
Um a warlock can take powers not related to pact. Im a dark/infernal but I took cackling flames as my 5th level daily why cause its an awsome power and goes with my characters theme. I see it as each class having multiple ways of doing things. Ranger can easily be good with both ranged and two weapon fighting by taking powers that work with both.