D&D General For the Love of Greyhawk: Why People Still Fight to Preserve Greyhawk

[The Mirrorball Man]

But a new and vibrant campaign setting, that incorporated aspects of the old while paving the way for the new in a way that introduced new fans to the setting? That's something I could like. As I write, the thing that matters most is the quality of the end product. Take the best, and leave the rest.

Again, what's the hook? What is unique about Greyhawk? Eberron is a noir and pulp fantasy campaign setting in which magic has been harnessed to fuel an industrial revolution. Theros is a campaign setting inspired by Greek Mythology where larger than life heroes dedicate their exploits to a pantheon of meddling Gods. In one sentence, what is Greyhawk?

 

[amethal]

I can name nearly a dozen cities and countries for FR, but for Greyhawk I only know that there is the Free City of Greyhawk... and I have no idea why it is called the Free City. Is it in the middle of that Evil Empire of Iuz? What makes the city of Greyhawk special enough that I'd want to go there?

It's called the Free City because it is a city state. That doesn't make it very special, as there are a couple of other city states nearby, although Greyhawk is the biggest of them so it sometimes dominates its neighbours (depending which version of the setting you are using). Its rise to prominence is comparatively recent - when the region was part of the Great Kingdom of Aerdy it wasn't even the provincial capital.

Naming the world after the city is an out-of-character thing; people who live there don't refer to the World of Greyhawk. It took me a while to get Greyhawk (city), Flanaess (region), Oerik (continent), and Oerth (world) straight.

 

[TwoSix]

And, the advantage of a setting like that, is that you can run both games in the same setting. Shifting from a border town in the middle of nowhere to a major metropolis with vast resources lets you play both styles of game, without having to switch settings. Something you can't do if the resources simply never existed in the world. And sure, we could talk about how "X high level spell means you can trivially travel to take advantage of those resources" but you can't really have a properly gritty game when people can just teleport wherever they want anyways, and a lack of magical resources means that your PCs are suddenly scarier than anything else in the world, because nothing else has access to the capabilities the party does.

I think this is an important distinction. I think for a number of people, the distinctions between settings extend beyond any one particular campaign. There's a difference between "This setting has a lot of areas with high magic, but we're not playing there" and "This setting doesn't have high magic at all."

The fact that Eberron DOES have Sharn and Faerun DOES have Netheril and Halruaa change the definition of the setting, even if you don't ever go there in play.

I do agree, though, that pointing out that a setting merely favors a particular flavor of campaign isn't overly compelling. As you say, I can easily do "cold blooded mercenaries doing dungeon dives for treasure" in Eberron or the Realms and simply not feature the wide or high magic aspects of the setting as needed.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I have never read Moorcock or Conan either. So, you are comparing a thing I don't know except through references to a thing I don't know except through references.

This seems like a problem that's really hard to solve. You basically seem to be in a position where you don't know what Sword and Sorcery is and aren't interested in finding out. Which is fine, but it means your arguments are from a position of ignorance, so you may find them convincing, but obviously others are not going to, and some points are going to be very hard to deal with, because you simply don't have the context to adequately understand them, and it's not context that can be trivially delivered to you.

I'm struggling to think of modern fantasy authors who write stuff that's definitely S&S (or movies, or TV series - Spartacus was kind of close, but without the sorcery - it's sword and sandal, which is a related genre). You have people like Joe Abercrombie who are kind of close, but they tend to lack the mercenary-but-heroic-but-mercenary vibe that S&S typically has. The Malazan series by Steven Erikson isn't tonally a million miles away but is also a kind of extreme epic fantasy, which just sort of slides into being S&S at times. Scott Lynch's Locke Lamora books have a very Fritz Leiber-esque kind of S&S vibe to them, but there's also other stuff going on.

FR is a setting in decline too. The greatest ages of magic are behind them.

That isn't really true in the tone of the setting, though. Particularly as written by Ed Greenwood himself. Yes, the greatest magical empires might be gone, but most of them sucked pretty bad, and magic is still evolving and modernizing. New things are happening. New societies and cities and nations are emerging, and they're not worse than the past - in many cases they're distinctly better. Overall it is completely fair to compare the FR to mainstream high fantasy. It's no more a story of "decline" than WoW or FFXIV is. Yeah, bigger magic happened in the past (though insanely big stuff happens regularly, like on every edition-change!), but the past isn't "a better time", or even necessarily a bigger one.

Whereas in GH, the past clearly was, in many ways, a better time, where bigger, more important things happened. And this is true tonally, as well as technically.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

There are a lot of possible directions a setting book for a 5e Greyhawk could take. But everything would need to emphasize the play theme WotC wants to go for, not as a way to show off Greyhawk but as a way to showcase that play style. If a Greyhawk 5e book is going to find a market of 5e customers, then it has be the 5e resource doing a sword and sorcery gritty campaign, and be a great Greyhawk resource second.

A challenge would be doing it in a way to meet the post-Tasha’s 5e direction of different “lineages“ not being necessarily evil. Maybe instead of rebooting 1983, advance the Greyhawk calendar a couple centuries. Bone March and Pomarj could be origins of non-evil orcs, even if those nations still come into conflict with neighbors. Orcs under Iuz would still fit the old stereotype.

Doing Greyhawk in a way that hardens to old Gygax race stereotypes just as 5e is moving beyond them would not fly. Greyhawk would need a design that accommodated the 5e direction and baking in the 1983 characteristics ... has issues. Advancing the setting, but having strong influences of the 1983 thin descriptions would make sense.

(bold added)

Great comment- although maybe better in the anthropocentric thread.

I think we have to preface this by acknowledging that we aren't entirely sure how Tasha's is going to treat lineages. But I think that instead of being a dealbreaker, this would be a perfect opportunity for enhancing and modernizing the setting.

One of the interesting and fun aspects of GH is bizarre politics of it all; not just on the old alignment axis (good, evil, and a muscular neutrality) but also the sheer number of petty kingdoms and fiefdoms, free Cities and border areas, decaying empires and barbarian hordes, fighting over scraps.

Making the intentionality of the (old word here) humanoids matter as opposed to just the alignment- well, that makes them more interesting players in the political squabbles. Heck, under the "enemy of my enemy is my friend," would PCs intervene to assist in a turf battle between Suel supremacists and Drow? For which side? After a falling out, would Furyondy provide tacit (and hidden) support to the Horned Society against Iuz?

I don't see this as a problem, so much as an opportunity for awesome!

 

[Wishbone]

This seems like a problem that's really hard to solve. You basically seem to be in a position where you don't know what Sword and Sorcery is and aren't interested in finding out. Which is fine, but it means your arguments are from a position of ignorance, so you may find them convincing, but obviously others are not going to, and some points are going to be very hard to deal with, because you simply don't have the context to adequately understand them, and it's not context that can be trivially delivered to you.

I'm struggling to think of modern fantasy authors who write stuff that's definitely S&S (or movies, or TV series - Spartacus was kind of close, but without the sorcery - it's sword and sandal, which is a related genre). You have people like Joe Abercrombie who are kind of close, but they tend to lack the mercenary-but-heroic-but-mercenary vibe that S&S typically has. The Malazan series by Steven Erikson isn't tonally a million miles away but is also a kind of extreme epic fantasy, which just sort of slides into being S&S at times. Scott Lynch's Locke Lamora books have a very Fritz Leiber-esque kind of S&S vibe to them, but there's also other stuff going on.

I've seen The Witcher TV show called Sword & Sorcery.

 

[Mortellan]

Again, what's the hook? What is unique about Greyhawk? Eberron is a noir and pulp fantasy campaign setting in which magic has been harnessed to fuel an industrial revolution. Theros is a campaign setting inspired by Greek Mythology where larger than life heroes dedicate their exploits to a pantheon of meddling Gods. In one sentence, what is Greyhawk?

Ooh ooh let me try!

Greyhawk is adventurers exploring ancient ruins for treasure against the backdrop of impending continental war and political strife.

 

[Coroc]

This seems like a problem that's really hard to solve. You basically seem to be in a position where you don't know what Sword and Sorcery is and aren't interested in finding out. Which is fine, but it means your arguments are from a position of ignorance, so you may find them convincing, but obviously others are not going to, and some points are going to be very hard to deal with, because you simply don't have the context to adequately understand them, and it's not context that can be trivially delivered to you.

I'm struggling to think of modern fantasy authors who write stuff that's definitely S&S (or movies, or TV series - Spartacus was kind of close, but without the sorcery - it's sword and sandal, which is a related genre). You have people like Joe Abercrombie who are kind of close, but they tend to lack the mercenary-but-heroic-but-mercenary vibe that S&S typically has. The Malazan series by Steven Erikson isn't tonally a million miles away but is also a kind of extreme epic fantasy, which just sort of slides into being S&S at times. Scott Lynch's Locke Lamora books have a very Fritz Leiber-esque kind of S&S vibe to them, but there's also other stuff going on.



That isn't really true in the tone of the setting, though. Particularly as written by Ed Greenwood himself. Yes, the greatest magical empires might be gone, but most of them sucked pretty bad, and magic is still evolving and modernizing. New things are happening. New societies and cities and nations are emerging, and they're not worse than the past - in many cases they're distinctly better. Overall it is completely fair to compare the FR to mainstream high fantasy. It's no more a story of "decline" than WoW or FFXIV is. Yeah, bigger magic happened in the past (though insanely big stuff happens regularly, like on every edition-change!), but the past isn't "a better time", or even necessarily a bigger one.

Whereas in GH, the past clearly was, in many ways, a better time, where bigger, more important things happened. And this is true tonally, as well as technically.

Well, a modern thing which goes a little bit into S&S is Game of Thrones. Although the historic equivalent is a bit more high medieval, parts of the GoT world are definitely closer to Conans surroundings.

 

[TwoSix]

I've seen The Witcher TV show called Sword & Sorcery.

I'm not particularly interested in exactly what works get thrown into what genre, but the Witcher, as well as Abercrombie and Lynch would make fine inspirations for a rebooted Greyhawk.

 

[amethal]

I'd be happy with a short setting document that had very basic setting details - deities and domains, and maybe some backgrounds, a discussion of races and subclasses, a brief timeline - and then opening Greyhawk up on DMs Guild with an express statement that people can write stuff for any time period they like.