GH and FR are both generic, in that they aren't loaded with a pile of unique conditions, like Dark Sun or Ravenloft, and are generally all-inclusive. Sure, they each have some unique stuff, but you can set most any generic adventure there.
But... 'including dragonborn' seems to be a set in stone dealbreaker for you, so there doesn't seem to be much point in arguing about it. I find it all pretty shruggable myself, and I'm a long time GH fan...
I've actually said this before a couple times earlier in the thread, I actually don't really mind if Dragonborn are added as long as their origin is from a far-off land and are treated with a mixture of fascination/horror in the Flaenass. Something like that doesn't really change the underlying status-quo of Greyhawk much and adds new lore to an area that wouldn't normally get it.
It's much the same approach that GoS took to adding a Tiefling (there is one NPC from the cambion-ruled nation there, but the book goes out of its way to say that tieflings/dragonborn PCs would be treated as utterly alien). It's one I largely agree with.
Umm, you realize when Greyhawk came out, it DID include every single option in the game right? Plus more actually considering that there are a bajillion elf variants.
The notion that what makes Greyhawk Greyhawk is somehow exclusion is pretty bizarre.
When Greyhawk came out, it was essentially the
only and first D&D setting (unless your counting Blackmoor). The game of D&D moved on from then, adding way more material, a lot of material that some would argue make no sense in the context Greyhawk establishes.
And look, I agree with you that Greyhawk has a metric ton of player options, not just for Elves but also for humans, adding things like the gold-skinned Baklunish and the albino violet-eyed Suel.
The Player's Handbook is considered the baseline of the Dungeons & Dragons game. Every setting, whenever its printed for a specific edition, has to account for what's in the Player's Handbook. It creates a minimum set of expectations, and even if the option isn't going to be allowed (IE gnomes in Dark Sun) it needs to be addressed (gnomes are extinct in Dark Sun). When a setting is updated to a new edition, it MUST address whats in that edition's Player's Handbook or it fails as a supplement for that edition.
I'm still waiting on a good reason why they don't need every PHB race, beyond "I only want what existed in 1983 in there", which I found lacking strength.
Ravnica doesn't address all the races in the PHB. But it's still a good book, and a successful one in sales. So no, this isn't necessary.
Look (and this is to everybody), I'm not actually against any changes to Greyhawk, I'm not even for a full reset (I like Age of Worms for example). I think change can be good, it can create more material that is useful and interesting.
What I am
not in favor for is change for the sake of change. 4e Dark Sun took two of its unique-looking races, Dray and Half-Giants, and made them Dragonborn and Goliath under different names. That weakened what Dark Sun was, and I don't want the same to happen to Greyhawk.
The changes GoS made by adding a Tiefling were positive; none of the old material was contradicted, the setting's tone remained consistent, and a race was introduced that made sense within the context presented. The same can be done with other races like Dragonborn.
EDIT: I think I've made my case here, not sure I have anything more to add.
