• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D (2024) Greyhawk Confirmed. Tell Me Why.


log in or register to remove this ad

Remathilis

Legend
A lot of these things didn’t exist originally for Forgotten Realms, or Eberron, or any other setting created in earlier times before new rules debuted.

Settings are not tied to rules.
Eberron was made for 3.5. But Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Mystara, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft and Spelljammer all predate 3e and by the Greyhawk Rule NONE of them should have sorcerers, dwarven wizards or goliaths apparently.
 




TiQuinn

Registered User
Both.

Is WOTC going to include "Traditionally orcs are almost all evil in Greyhawk. This is how you can introduce a good nation or city-state of a traditional evil species like orcs of goblins..." in the DMG.
You do it the same way they handled King Obould Many-Arrows in Forgotten Realms. Just because something was written a particular way in 1983, doesn’t mean it has to hold true for today.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Eberron was made for 3.5. But Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Mystara, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft and Spelljammer all predate 3e and by the Greyhawk Rule NONE of them should have sorcerers, dwarven wizards or goliaths apparently.
Cultures of any given setting can easily restrict those kind of PC options. The more specific and bespoke the setting, the more likely such restrictions are to be in place (and to make sense to be there). That is, if the decision isn't made to just sell everything, all the time, to everyone, and never mind the integrity of the fiction.

Guess which side WotC almost always falls on?
 

MGibster

Legend
But that's the problem. Greyhawk is old and didn't contain many of the 2024's game's -options and aspects.
I imagine they'll adapt it, what little of "it" there is, to modern sensibilities. It might make some people upset, but who cares? No matter what they do people are going to be upset.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
You do it the same way they handled King Obould Many-Arrows in Forgotten Realms. Just because something was written a particular way in 1983, doesn’t mean it has to hold true for today.
Sure.

So is WOTC going to put a non-evil Orc nation or city-state in the Greyhawk in the DMG?
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
This isn't a full blown setting we're talking about here. It's an example setting in the DMG to help people learn about how to build a setting. Otherwise, I'm kind of with you. Whenever someone brings up Dark Sun or Birthright I can't help but think, "Those settings had a chance. Why not do something new?" But it hasn't really mattered because WotC really hasn't been in the business of creating settings like they used to be. In some ways that's a good thing, I don't think we need a glut of settings like we had back in 1993. But then again many of the settings material they've released have been terrible.
Thing is, they don't need to put in much to match what Gygaxian Greyhawk entailed.

For context, this is the table of contents contents the 1980 folio, the only Greyhawk Setting product for 3 years, which h was followed by the 1083 boxed set which didn't add much I would expect to see in Amy modern treatment (8 pages on weather generation? Neat, but not heppenong). Thar was then the only Greyhawk Aetting stuff available until 1988, which did not involved Gygax at all. This could be covered in a chapter of the 384 page DMG:

Screenshot_20240517_211220_Chrome.jpg
 

Remove ads

Top