D&D 5E Mike Mearls on Settings

rgoodbb · Apr 15, 2017

Mouseferatu said:
Give us Eberron, Al Qadim, Dark Sun first. Then do Greyhawk.

I must read this every day to help lower my acid.
I must read this every day to help lower my acid.
I must read this every day to help lower my acid.
I must read this every day to help lower my acid.
I must read this every day to help lower my acid.
I must read this every day to help lower my acid.

Patrick McGill · Apr 15, 2017

I doubt very much, if we're talking timelines, that Greyhawk would be the next setting they release. If we're going by UA for clues, Ebberon stuff went on UA forever ago. (That obvs doesn't mean it's first either, I'm just pointing out that Mike releasing a GH UA doesn't necessarily mean it's next up to bat.)

discosoc · Apr 15, 2017

CapnZapp said:
Problem is - I don't think this is what old Greyhawk hands want.

I OTOH would love to see the domain system and monster-ruled nations, and I really don't care if they implement it for the Cerilia map or the Greyhawk map

Probably not. It's just one of the few ways I can see differentiating the setting from FR enough to warrant a publication.

Azzy · Apr 15, 2017

Gradine said:
This. Any official 5e Greyhawk campaign guide is going to include some explanation for why Tieflings and Dragonborn are there. That is pretty much inevitable.

Tieflings are easy... The amount of fiendish cavorting going on in the Great Kingdom and the lands of Iuz alone is legendary.

Dragonborn can be wedged in there, just have them as uncommon and hailing from some remote area to the West (or whatever).

hawkeyefan · Apr 15, 2017

Hussar said:
To be fair though, the number of actual rule changes in Thule can be listed on about 5 pages, and most of those would deal with the descriptions of the new Backgrounds (called Narratives in PT). Other than some minor equipment changes, a few flavor changes, and the suggestion to exclude paladins and monks (mostly a holdover from 3e mentality since paladins in 5e aren't paragons of virtue and monks have a much broader background), there isn't a whole lot of actual mechanics changes.

My point is, you don't need a book full of crunch to make things different. The mechanics just don't take up that many pages.

-----

Hey, I know how you could differentiate Greyhawk.... WARLORDS EVERYWHERE!!!!!!

Oh I agree....a few pages is likely all that's needed. If even that, in this case. I'm just curious what those rules would be. Not many suggestions so far.

The rest of the book could be a mix of adventure and gazzeteer.

Davelozzi said:
I agree here completely. I enjoyed the Drizzt novels as a kid but haven't read any in the past two decades, but from what I remember in the earlier ones, Drizzt did have a lot of difficulty getting accepted everywhere he went and was seen as a bogeyman. Even Alustriel wouldn't let him into Silverymoon. I am not sure when things changed exactly on that score (and am guessing it had something to do with the introduction of Eilistraee), but in fact I am just about to start up my first Realms campaign in almost as long (a run through of Storm King's Thunder, though probably set back in the earlier Realms timeline), and that is exactly what I am going for. My one player that was new to the game suggested a drow after flipping through the PHB totally unaware of their baggage, and I was frankly very surprised to hear that they were even listed in the PHB as a potential player race in the first place. I explained they were bad guys in my game if he didn't want to be chased out of every town and be constantly under attack and suspicion and he wisely went with a green/wood elf instead.

Sooo...no bahgage for the new plauer until you foisted it on him?

Azzy said:
Tieflings are easy... The amount of fiendish cavorting going on in the Great Kingdom and the lands of Iuz alone is legendary.

Dragonborn can be wedged in there, just have them as uncommon and hailing from some remote area to the West (or whatever).

Back then, it was Cambions all over the place.

Davelozzi · Apr 15, 2017

hawkeyefan said:
Sooo...no bahgage for the new plauer until you foisted it on him?

Exactly...but the rest of my players had the baggage aplenty and probably would have given the newbie (& me) hell if he showed up with a drow, especially a dual wielder (which was his first thought).

Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

Demetrios1453 · Apr 15, 2017

Gradine said:
This. Any official 5e Greyhawk campaign guide is going to include some explanation for why Tieflings and Dragonborn are there. That is pretty much inevitable.

Tieflings wouldn't be hard, given Iuz and the history of the Great Kingdom. Dragonborn, I admit, would take a significant amount of more work.

EDIT: Heh, I see Azzy said almost exactly the same thing!

Hussar · Apr 15, 2017

Demetrios1453 said:
Tieflings wouldn't be hard, given Iuz and the history of the Great Kingdom. Dragonborn, I admit, would take a significant amount of more work.

EDIT: Heh, I see Azzy said almost exactly the same thing!

This is a setting with Yak-men. Do you really think Dragonborn would be that much of a hurdle?

Hrm, as per [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION], what mechanics would you like to see in a Greyhawk game?

Domain building - building a castle was a major thing back in the day, and that should be a big incentive for players in the setting.
Obviously some sub-classes and backgrounds based on the setting - Crimson Corsairs, Scarlet Brotherhood monks, that sort of thing.
Deeper exploration rules - this is a setting where a lot of the lands are pretty open and wild. Exploration is a big deal so, make the exploration pillar a bigger deal.
((This one might not be popular)) Rules to scale back the wahoo level of magic that the classes get.
Expansion of non-magical classes (or at least not very magical) to give more options for a lower magic focused party.

What else do people got?

Patrick McGill · Apr 15, 2017

I think "basic" versions of the core 4 classes would be cool. I don't mean like "champion, life domain" etc. I mean stripped down versions of the core class that basically resemble what the classes look like now without any subclass components.

Obviously you couldn't just strip the subclass part out and call it good as some classes lean more heavily then others on their subclass, but that'd be about the jist of it for me.

Oofta · Apr 15, 2017

Bah. Young whipper-snappers. If you're going to go old school go really old school like it was meant to be played. Dwarves are fighters. Hobbits - yes hobbits dag-nabit non of this pussy-footin' around with "halflings" were dirty little thieves. Elves were munchkins that could be fighters or magic-users. They could even switch between campaigns. Dirty cheaters.

And of course men were men. No womenfolk around here.

Old. School.