*POLL* Do You Feel That Greyhawk is a Dead Campaign Officially?

[SHARK]

Greyhawk has been dead since 1E. I would probably feel different if I was in the RPGA, but as far as "official" support goes, its been dead since 1E. A bone thrown out here and there just didn't, and doesn't, cut it with me.

Sorry you RPGA people have had the rug pulled out from under you.

Greetings!

I agree, Treebore. Excellent post! I guess you and I--and many others--are suffering under some kind of arrogant delusion for thinking that Greyhawk is dead, and has been for some time--many years, in fact--despite a few people that seem to hold to the belief that Greyhawk has been supported just *fine* because of a few adventure modules produced, and "support in the magazines". *rolls eyes* That just doesn't make any sense to me whatesoever. I don't know of anyone except a few people here that would think that Greyhawk has been well-supported--somehow, those few adventures and support in magazines is "good support" to them. And yet, I look around, and Greyhawk fan after Greyhawk fan--I would say that there is a strong consensus--holds to the belief that Greyhawk is dead, has been dead, and has not been well-supported in many, many years. Furthermore, as you pointed out--the magazine articles in Dungeon and Dragon, and the occasional adventure--and *gosh*--textual references in the rulebooks!--does not represent real support, but a weak, half-hearted effort at best--despite the desires of some designers--like Erik Mona--to do more.

Sadly, Greyhawk has been crushed and beaten and left on the roadside for many years now, and I think that the new 4E will throw the last shovels of dirt on it.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[Treebore]

The RPGA "Living Greyhawk" people have had some decent support materials, but yeah, I think its pretty obvious that GH has not been supported anything close to the way Faerun and Eberron have.

I mean look at Forgotten Realms. There is a RPGA world for it, and look at all the books that were still printed for it.

So yes, support for GH has been "token" at best. At least that is the kindest adjective I would use.

 

[Treebore]

License that sucker out, that's my advice!

To Paizo, preferably...

-The Gneech

Erik Mona has stated over on the PAizo boards that they have been trying every year. Now that "Living Greyhawk" is dead (shortly), and it isn't the vaguely implied official setting anymore, maybe Erik and Paizo will finally get their hands on it.

 

[pemerton]

I have GMed a lot in Greyhawk and plan to do so again. I don't really see how the lack of published support hurts it from the individual GM's point of view - presumably anyone who knows and cares about the setting has some material for it, and can use that to play with. Most scenarios can be pretty easily dropped somewhere or other into the world (for example, I'm planning to run a campaign based on a number of the Penumbra modules, setting them probably in the vicinity of Urnst and the Free City).

Undoubtedly a lack of publications means the setting does not attract new users. But I don't see how that affects current users. What am I missing?

 

[Seeker95]

I voted Barely Supported, but regret that the choice implies this is a bad thing. The Realms, in my opinion, are too bloated. Greyhawk is perfect. The designers have kept their over-detailing, timeline-convoluting hands off my beloved setting. And I am grateful.

 

[Flynn]

I voted Withered and Dead, since I haven't seen a Greyhawk-specific supplement since the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (November 2000). Generic rulebooks and splatbooks introduce options that work in generic D&D campaigns, and ultimately do no more to build Greyhawk than they do to build FR or Eberron, despite putting a Greyhawk-inspired label on it. Living Greyhawk has been an RPGA-supported thing, and does little to add materials for non-RPGA members. Also, I consider LG to be sponsored by WOTC, not supported by it.

If you aren't RPGA, Greyhawk has been dead for six years, eight months and counting.

I hope that someday WOTC remembers that there are non-RPGA members that love that setting, too. Even one supplement a year is more than what we have been getting as support since 3E entered the picture.

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[+5 Keyboard!]

Greetings!

It is my feeling that Greyhawk has long been dead as an official campaign world. Yes, it has been supported in the magazines, and with an occasional adventure, but not much more. Compared to the support that Forgotten Realms recieves, Greyhawk gets next to nothing, and this has been true for many years. The latest developments do not persuade me that Greyhawk will continue to be largely beaten down, ignored, and buried as an official campaign world by WOTC.

Your thoughts?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

For what it's worth I've voted on your unofficial, and largely meaningless poll. In the future, try starting your polls without such a heavily biased opinion and you might get responses that aren't influenced by your own feelings. It might actually make the responses more credible.

Comparing Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk is a little clunky as a basis of support since FR is a setting about... well... the setting. Greyhawk is a setting about adventures. The adventures are what make the setting, not the other way around, which is the case with the Forgotten Realms. There's so much focus on not getting supplement books that people tend to overlook the fact that while GH may not have gotten much in the way of that kind of support, there have always been a constant flow of GH articles appearing in Dragon and adventures in Dungeon.

I can't say what the future of Greyhawk OR the Forgotten Realms will be for sure, but my educated guess is that it will be much the same as it has been, but in the case of the former it will be in digital and print on demand format since the two aforementioned magazines will now be electronic.

 

[Sunderstone]

On a more positive note, I use the Living Greyhawk Gazeteer for a Campaign Setting Sourcebook and a few pdfs (though I wish I had the print versions) like Iuz The Evil, The Scarlet Brotherhood, the Marklands, and Greyhawk: the Adventure Begins. I also still have older 2E modules like Against the Giants: The Liberation of Geoff, The Slavers etc. which have a decent amount of information on areas like Geoff, Sterich, and the Nyr Dyv.

While a 3.5 one shot HC sourcebook of this would be great, Im ok with what I have.

For the most part, the adventures Ive been running have enough background info to not need any books. Im a stickler for detail and flavor though so I use the information from the Gazeteer and pdfs when I can.
Greyhawk is not dead, at least for me.

 

[amethal]

Erik Mona has stated over on the PAizo boards that they have been trying every year. Now that "Living Greyhawk" is dead (shortly), and it isn't the vaguely implied official setting anymore, maybe Erik and Paizo will finally get their hands on it.

Would that be financial madness, or not?

I have no idea how numerous Greyhawk fans are. They are certainly very vocal.

I don't know whether they buy Forgotten Realms or Eberron products.

I don't know whether they buy generic D&D products.

I don't know whether they are on a limited budget.

WotC probably has better information than I do, but if I was the brand manager and had a choice between

a) saying "No" to a licence; or
b) running the risk of future WotC products doing very badly in certain months because Paizo happened to release a competing Greyhawk product

then it would be very tempting to go with option a).

Especially when they have the option of producing their own Greyhawk book in 2010, probably written by the much the same people who would have written Paizo's.

Come to think of it, if I was the brand manager I'd bring out the Greyhawk book in 2010, then licence the setting to Paizo to produce adventures.

 

[Mortellan]

That's the second time I've noticed you say this, though I would bet you have used this phrase more often. It's like you think it is clever or something. Is there some reason you don't think this is offensive and over the line?

I agree its clever and maybe over the line. Lesse, if GH fans are necrophiliac (prefers ghoul), then I assume that would make fans of supported settings lemmings. Eh, not as nasty but just as true.