D&D General Greyhawk setting material

[Paul Farquhar]

The "original" Barovia was a stand alone, not part of any setting (not even Ravenloft, which didn't exist yet). It was later reconned as having been part of FR before being absorbed by the demiplane.

But the truth is, every game world becomes it's own unique version of that world as soon as the players start interacting with it, even if the DM tries to be as faithful to the (contradictory) source material as possible.

My advice: use a setting as a starting point to save work, but do whatever you like with it. You want Barovia in Greyhawk? Do it!

 

[Azzy]

Wow, getting spanked really bothers you huh?

Spank me harder, daddy!

 

[Coroc]

Spank me harder, daddy!

The Masochist: "Please Spank me!" the Sadist: "Uhm, No!"

 

[Parmandur]

The "original" Barovia was a stand alone, not part of any setting (not even Ravenloft, which didn't exist yet). It was later reconned as having been part of FR before being absorbed by the demiplane.

But the truth is, every game world becomes it's own unique version of that world as soon as the players start interacting with it, even if the DM tries to be as faithful to the (contradictory) source material as possible.

My advice: use a setting as a starting point to save work, but do whatever you like with it. You want Barovia in Greyhawk? Do it!

Nope, Castle Ravenloft has never been eaten by the FR.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Strahd is from Barovia, prime Barovia is in the Forgotten realms somewhere in the center (You won't find it on many official FR maps though but there are some sources placing it there) I read about that on the Fraternity of Shadows page, which is the source for Ravenloft Lore and other things.

Some other vampire domain lord who was pretty much one of the first in RLoft is from GH though I cannot recall which one right now.

Azalin originates in GH too.

I'm pretty sure Barovia has never been a part of the Forgotten Realms, but I know it isn't presently. It got sucked up into the Domains of Dread, which are in turn part of the Shadowfell.

Also really have no idea what LuisCarlos17f is talking about.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I'll add that this really isn't "setting material," but if you want something relatively recent from Greyhawk I would check out the Age of Worms adventure path from Dungeon magazine. Quick google searching can find it.

Anyway it's a pretty interesting campaign and uses Greyhawk villains and locations, like the Free City, the god Kyuss and his dracolich general Dragotha.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I agree about TTRPGs are like LEGO or other construction toys, after buying the product you create as you want and it hasn't to be like in the cover of the box.

And we shouldn't reject changes in the franchises of speculative fiction. The comics by marvel or DC in 2020 aren't like the strips published in 1930.

I don't want fantasy worlds with "empty spaces", but I would rather to change those zones as I want.

Dragonlance is a good hook to get new fans, but it was born more to be media than a TTRPG. If there is a future movie or teleserie, we could find some retcontinity changes.

* WotC has still the option to show fan-art in the web with ideas abour alternative timelines, and it hasn't to be canon.

 

[David Howery]

* Today GH and Dragonlance are too "frozen",

I haven't really been involved in D&D since 3E came out, but... didn't GH get 'frozen' mainly because nothing was done with it since 2E days?

Couldn't find the original thread about the map issue and my attention was diverted by my daughter and her home work.

If you gotta get distracted from D&D, that's a darn good reason.

Spank me harder, daddy!

The Masochist: "Please Spank me!" the Sadist: "Uhm, No!"

this thread just took a disturbing turn....

 

[Urriak Uruk]

It is pretty interesting to think what a true Greyhawk setting book would look like in 5e... Mike Mearls has pretty much said aloud that he would make the book as sandbox-y as possible (he spoke on it extensively as a guest on Dragon Talk). That discussion IMO pretty much makes any chance of a big "Greyhawk Reset" for 5e pretty much off the table.

At the same time, based on what was released in Ghosts of Saltmarsh, the team is willing to make some tweaks to the setting to allow for the new 5e paradigm. Tieflings are now canon to that setting (and I'm using "canon" loosely, I know there's really no such thing for D&D). They even made art for a tiefling NPC from Iuz's Empire, though still stated that people are fearful and horrified of them. The book even mentions Dragonborn, though not as being present in Greyhawk but instead being something that people would react to with "fear and revulsion."

The setting itself also isn't as "out of the box" as Dark Sun or Eberron and isn't going to provide a bunch of new classes and rules. I don't even know if I know a single race/subrace unique to Greyhawk (please correct me if there is one).

I imagine a new setting book would actually be 25% new adventure, 25% tools on making adventures in Greyhawk, 10% new rules for players (mostly stuff like backgrounds), and 40% lore on the various locations/culture. But that's just my thoughts.

 

[David Howery]

It is pretty interesting to think what a true Greyhawk setting book would look like in 5e.

I would think that they could just take the 1983 boxed set and update it with some of the notes and adventure hooks from Dragon and future products (and ignore the Wars). Tieflings have apparently already been introduced (with Iuz back in his land, you'd think that demons would be around more, and tieflings a natural result of that). Dragonborn might be a bit harder, but could be presented as a new race just recently appearing in Faerun, but rumors of them in other lands had been heard for years.

I don't even know if I know a single race/subrace unique to Greyhawk

The Valley Elves were unique to Greyhawk. In 1E days, they were a bit different, being taller and stronger than normal elves. I think 5E lumped them in with one of the other common group of elves.