What is Greyhawk?

[Garthanos]

Greed is good said the Antipaladin.

How else do you get experience points?

 

[Hussar]

Sorry haven't been following this thread so the conversation may have moved on, but I loved this post. And those are all (more or less) reasons I like Greyhawk more than FR.

A lot of people cite all the books about FR as an advantage, that there's all this "lore". I actually think it's a downside. I've only read a few of the books (and detest them) so I'm actually mostly ignorant of FR lore. But all the official supplements seem to assume some base level of lore. I don't think it's intentional, but names and place and such get sprinkled about here and there, and although I'm sure the authors are thinking that you don't HAVE to know what they refer to, the reality is that it's hard to get the gestalt of the whole thing without knowing. I'm sure for people who are fans of all the books these constant references improve the experience, but for those of us who are in the dark it lessens in. (Or for me, anyway.)

So, yeah, Greyhawk: I don't recall ever having that same (negative) experience.

And maybe that's your point #7.

I understand the point you're making here, but, you're forgetting an important side point. Settings, by and large, are for DM's. The players don't care that much and most of their knowledge of a setting will come from that DM. This is particularly true in smaller settings like, say, Primeval Thule, where, outside of maybe reading the player primer (and that's a BIG maybe), the players know nothing about the setting and, really, don't care that much. The DM, OTOH, is trying to do all these things to bring the setting to life for the players and is likely thinking, at least in the back of the mind sort of way, about the setting every time an adventure is written or whatnot.

OTOH, for Forgotten Realms, you have this MASSIVE library of player facing material. What 300 (ish) novels? Video games galore. It's pretty likely that a player, with any degree of gaming experience, has a basic grasp of what the Realms is, and some degree of background in the setting. It makes the DM's job easier because the DM isn't forced to keep trying to info-dump setting information on the players just to get them to have a minimal grounding in the setting itself.

It really is a double edged sword. It's great that a new player, sitting at your table, has a reasonable idea of the geography and societies of your setting. It's also a major pain in the ass that a new player, sitting at your table, has a reasonable idea of the geography and societies of your setting.

 

[Shardstone]

I understand the point you're making here, but, you're forgetting an important side point. Settings, by and large, are for DM's. The players don't care that much and most of their knowledge of a setting will come from that DM. This is particularly true in smaller settings like, say, Primeval Thule, where, outside of maybe reading the player primer (and that's a BIG maybe), the players know nothing about the setting and, really, don't care that much. The DM, OTOH, is trying to do all these things to bring the setting to life for the players and is likely thinking, at least in the back of the mind sort of way, about the setting every time an adventure is written or whatnot.

OTOH, for Forgotten Realms, you have this MASSIVE library of player facing material. What 300 (ish) novels? Video games galore. It's pretty likely that a player, with any degree of gaming experience, has a basic grasp of what the Realms is, and some degree of background in the setting. It makes the DM's job easier because the DM isn't forced to keep trying to info-dump setting information on the players just to get them to have a minimal grounding in the setting itself.

It really is a double edged sword. It's great that a new player, sitting at your table, has a reasonable idea of the geography and societies of your setting. It's also a major pain in the ass that a new player, sitting at your table, has a reasonable idea of the geography and societies of your setting.

Most people in my generation (25 or younger) aren't really that well versed in the realms or know anything about it or, in a lot of cases, even know if it exists. I'm finding Realms stuff (and all its stigmas) are really a 30+ y.o thing.

 

[Hussar]

Most people in my generation (25 or younger) aren't really that well versed in the realms or know anything about it or, in a lot of cases, even know if it exists. I'm finding Realms stuff (and all its stigmas) are really a 30+ y.o thing.

Oh, that could quite possibly be.

Although, to be fair, I'm not sure I'd be able to generalize like that. After all, someone is putting Salvatore on the top of NYT best seller lists regularly. So, obviously there's someone out there that's reading Realms fiction. I mean, good grief, I can find Japanese translations of Realms fiction in my small town library here in Japan. So, it's pretty wide spread.

And, frankly, you are the target demographic for D&D. It's certainly not me, old fart that I am. And the fact that there are what, 5 Realms adventure paths for 5e means that anyone who's been playing 5e for a while is probably at least aware of the existence of Forgotten Realms. Unlike, say, Primeval Thule.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I understand the point you're making here, but, you're forgetting an important side point. Settings, by and large, are for DM's. The players don't care that much and most of their knowledge of a setting will come from that DM. This is particularly true in smaller settings like, say, Primeval Thule, where, outside of maybe reading the player primer (and that's a BIG maybe), the players know nothing about the setting and, really, don't care that much.

I see this said a lot, but the same folks mostly, but...what?

How the heck do you see enough players not caring about the setting that you’ve taken it as axiomatic!?

This is entirely, completely, foreign to me and my play experience.

 

[Hussar]

I see this said a lot, but the same folks mostly, but...what?

How the heck do you see enough players not caring about the setting that you’ve taken it as axiomatic!?

This is entirely, completely, foreign to me and my play experience.

Really? IME, players couldn't give a tiny rat's petoot about the setting. They really, really don't care. And, while I know that there are those out there that apparently have players that dive deep into settings, anecdotally, I'd say they were very rare and should be cherished.

Heck, getting players to read a four or five page setting background is rare. Skim, maybe. But actually learn about the setting? That's a rare player.

 

[Zardnaar]

DM has to bring the setting alive IMHO.

Helps to play up hard whatever makes that setting distinct.

 

[S'mon]

Really? IME, players couldn't give a tiny rat's petoot about the setting. They really, really don't care. And, while I know that there are those out there that apparently have players that dive deep into settings, anecdotally, I'd say they were very rare and should be cherished.

Heck, getting players to read a four or five page setting background is rare. Skim, maybe. But actually learn about the setting? That's a rare player.

This certainly fits my experience.

 

[Hussar]

DM has to bring the setting alive IMHO.

Helps to play up hard whatever makes that setting distinct.

Well, that's kinda my point. When you start with, say, Forgotten Realms, you can lean on the fact that your players probably have a decent knowledge of the setting. Or, at least it's far more likely that they know about elements of Forgotten Realms, than, say, Cerilia .

Which becomes something of an issue in play. You want to bring the setting to life, but, you also have to actually run the adventure, balance out what the players are doing, and juggle fifteen other balls. And, in the face of that, you have player apathy over the details of the setting itself because they are far more interested in their own characters and whatever the group is doing right now.

I mean, recently I started my Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign. I expressly told the group we would do character generation as a group. Session 0 starts and every single one of my players already had a character made, complete with background, NONE of them actually referencing the campaign. Drives me up the wall, but, hey, what are you going to do?

This is a problem I've been dealing with across many groups and ages. Trying to ground groups in a setting is HARD and often somewhat akin to nailing jello to a tree. I remember back when trying to get the group into Scarred Lands and having EXACTLY the same issues.

IME, most players do not care at all about settings. All the hoopla about blowing up settings and setting fidelity and "distinctness" of settings is all in the DM's head.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well, that's kinda my point. When you start with, say, Forgotten Realms, you can lean on the fact that your players probably have a decent knowledge of the setting. Or, at least it's far more likely that they know about elements of Forgotten Realms, than, say, Cerilia .

Which becomes something of an issue in play. You want to bring the setting to life, but, you also have to actually run the adventure, balance out what the players are doing, and juggle fifteen other balls. And, in the face of that, you have player apathy over the details of the setting itself because they are far more interested in their own characters and whatever the group is doing right now.

I mean, recently I started my Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign. I expressly told the group we would do character generation as a group. Session 0 starts and every single one of my players already had a character made, complete with background, NONE of them actually referencing the campaign. Drives me up the wall, but, hey, what are you going to do?

This is a problem I've been dealing with across many groups and ages. Trying to ground groups in a setting is HARD and often somewhat akin to nailing jello to a tree. I remember back when trying to get the group into Scarred Lands and having EXACTLY the same issues.

IME, most players do not care at all about settings. All the hoopla about blowing up settings and setting fidelity and "distinctness" of settings is all in the DM's head.

I don't disagree with any of that. I ran an Egyptian themed game. 0 anthromorphic races or Egyptian gods picked.

I bet if I ran FR that special player would want a gnoll or something.

O