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

[Cadence]

Trying to save myself going and digging up books from buried since the late 80s/early 90s - did any of the greek tragedies involve something akin to a redemptive arc? Or is a redemptive arc not particularly tragic? (A half-hearted google search wasn't much help).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Trying to save myself going and digging up books from buried since the late 80s/early 90s - did any of the greek tragedies involve something akin to a redemptive arc? Or is a redemptive arc not particularly tragic? (A half-hearted google search wasn't much help).

I'm not up on Greek Tragedy, but I can give you a Shakespeare one: Prospero in The Tempest.

 

[Aldarc]

Trying to save myself going and digging up books from buried since the late 80s/early 90s - did any of the greek tragedies involve something akin to a redemptive arc? Or is a redemptive arc not particularly tragic? (A half-hearted google search wasn't much help).

The 12 Tasks of Hercules after he killed his family in a fit of Hera-induced madness. A lot of non-Christian literary "redemption arcs" are tied to tragedy, often as the "redemption equals death" trope: e.g., Beowulf, etc.

 

[Chaosmancer]

"Redemption arc" is basically refers to a villain to hero story arc, but this isn't really a common trope for biblical writers. It's not entirely absent, but I would not say that what we think of nowadays as "redemption arcs" are particularly biblical in origin. I honestly think that is more indebted to comic book writing than anything as it often involves taking popular antagonistic characters and turning them into protagonistic characters or good-aligned side characters over the course of serialized publications.

There is approximately 2000 years of literature between the earliest written story of Gilgamesh and the Book of Daniel. So roughly the same length of time between today and either Virgil's Aeneid or the New Testament Gospels.

Okay, I'm trying to drop this conversation at this point, because the entire thrust of my argument was "Everything is based on something older, and you don't always have to be familiar with the oldest material to be able to appreciate the newer material and what it is doing."


But I think you are being a little to specific in your definition of what a "redemption arc" is. Han Solo has a redemption arc. He goes from a bit of a jerk, to a hero who is willing to put his life on the line. He was never an antagonist. That is not required for redemption. The soldier who ran from battle and got his friends killed could be seeking redemption, and could be seen as having a redemption arc, even if they are the protagonist the entire time.

Maybe I'm using a general term when there is a much more specific term to be used, but I think part of why you are having a hard time understanding what I'm trying to say is because you are hyper-focused on villains being redeemed into heroes, instead of more general redemption.

I'm not obsessing over anything here. I'm merely noting that I think that the more contemporaneous understanding of the redemption arc is rooted in serials. This does not to exclude other influences or the bigger picture.

That is the point.

Yes, the modern understanding of the concept might very well be rooted in comic serials.

But, by saying "the modern understanding of the concept" you are immediately noting that there is an older understanding of the same concept.

Which is what I was trying to say. Not that the modern understanding existed in the past, but that the concept existed in the past.

And I don't need to understand the past concept to understand the modern concept. Or, maybe the concept exists in multiple eras with different understandings, and even if I don't know about a more recent version, an older version might still help me understand.

The 12 Tasks of Hercules after he killed his family in a fit of Hera-induced madness. A lot of non-Christian literary "redemption arcs" are tied to tragedy, often as the "redemption equals death" trope: e.g., Beowulf, etc.

Again, yes, that is my point. Multiple takes on the same concept, with different understandings. (A lot of modern stuff also has "redemption equals death")

 

[Aldarc]

There is little to nothing to be gained from arguing these points further with you. I disagree, but I will choose to disengage.

 

[Voadam]

So Greyhawk is a couple things.

It is the early modules like DGQ series, the A series, the S series, the WG series, and the T1-4.

It is Gygax's world so default stuff for a lot of D&D.

Home of the named people in the PH spells.

It is a folio with over 40 lightly detailed kingdoms giving a range of medieval tropes, good to evil areas, some earth analogues, some D&Disms like lots of evil humanoids, some setting specific things.

It is unique human ethnicities (Flan, Oeridian, etc.) and terms for some things that are nonstandard for normal D&D (goblins are gebli, elves are olvenfolk, etc.)

It is some clear archetypal analogues and tropes: viking and mongol barbarians, arabic states in conflict with western europeanish kingdom ones, orders of good knights, pirate areas, etc.

It is setting specific things like the recently established demigod son of a demon lord kingdom, more recently revealed evil monk manipulators, D&D founder as a magically ascended god of humor and chaos magic.

It is the 83 boxed set which adds a ton of interesting gods broken down by human ethnicity pantheons.

It is one fantastic colorful iconic hex map.

It is Greyhawk city where there is a lot of organized crime, trade, lots of rich and poor, magic, and activity.

It is a world where people ascend, demon lords are trapped, gods have stats that can be interacted with, and powerful people adventure with lots of magic.

It is gritty low level medieval D&D where you can die easily.

It is high level high magic D&D with weird things going on.

It is a high altitude view of a diverse area that can inspire and be fleshed out by individual DMs.

It is a land with ancient magical empires that blew themselves up leaving loot and ruins.

It is a land where there have been lots of wars, things look like they are building to wars in a number of ways, and the military forces are one thing that are generally more detailed for most areas.

It is open areas that high level PCs can found their own kingdoms in and then go to war with neighbors using chainmail.

And that is all before you get to late 1e.

 

[Azzy]

Although I'm not close to @Ruin Explorer 's opinions on this, I will say that people have made some pretty compelling arguments and comparisons to other popular fiction in their pitch to Greyhawk.

So no, people don't expect you to have read these to understand what we are talking about. However, it is extremely frustrating when we give suggestions and comparisons, and you're reply is essentially "I haven't read that, and don't know that genre. Recommend something else or make a better pitch."

It's not our job to exhaustively go through the catalog of things you've read (we don't know you!) so for people to be annoyed that you don't have any willingness to learn about the subject, is justified.

So again, no you don't need to read Moorcock's books or buy a Conan pulp magazine. But yes, you need to be a little bit informed on the genre of S&S for you to understand the appeal of S&S. That's pretty standard on how learning works.

Here are some things you can read. If you won't, I think everyone should just give up on selling you Greyhawk.

What's The Difference Between Epic Fantasy And Sword-And-Sorcery?

As an editor at Pyr Books, Lou Anders has published tons of fantasy novels of all stripes. But now he's crafted his own fantasy novel, Frostborn, in the sword-and-sorcery tradition that goes back to Conan. But what's the difference between "epic fantasy" and "sword and sorcery"? Anders explains.

io9.gizmodo.com

Sword & Sorcery - 1d4chan

1d4chan.org

There's a problem with that midset, though. Forget about thinking of this as trying to pitch Greyhawk to Chaosmancer. That's pretty much not seeing the forest for the trees. This thread is about publishing a Greyhawk setting for 5e and trying to attract new players to experience and enjoy the setting that we hold dear. How would you pitch it to these knew players (who have likely little to no experience with the sword & sorcery literature that inspired not just Greyhawk, but D&D itself? Are you going to tell this prospective new audience to go do their homework to properly understand how cool this setting is? You know what the response to that is going to be, righ? That's going to be big turn-off and the majority of these new players will be like, "No thanks, there's these other settings that I can just dive into without reading some outdated fiction with some questionable content".

Treat Chaosmancer as you one of these new players, sell him Greyhawk in a way that doesn't require him to drop what they're doing and essentially do reseach for your sales-pitch has any meaning to them. You have to get a potential consumer to be excited about your product without them having any prior experience if you want that product to sell.

Personally, I'd go with: "Come experience the original setting of one of D&D's creators, Gary Gygax. Greyhawk captures the quintessential experience and spirit of D&D itself. Within these lands, fraught with a merciless mad king of a crumbling empire, the demonic might of a cambion demigod, and the machinations of a secret society dedicated to enslaving all others, stand the few, wearied pillars of good and light while, still others, strive to main a balance between all of the opposing factions."

Or something to that effect.

 

[Azzy]

What they need to do is publish the real origina, Gygax Castle Greyhawk. There's some people still around who have played it. I think Jim Ward did, for example.

Yeah, I don't think that's ever going to happen.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

There's a problem with that midset, though. Forget about thinking of this as trying to pitch Greyhawk to Chaosmancer. That's pretty much not seeing the forest for the trees. This thread is about publishing a Greyhawk setting for 5e and trying to attract new players to experience and enjoy the setting that we hold dear. How would you pitch it to these knew players (who have likely little to no experience with the sword & sorcery literature that inspired not just Greyhawk, but D&D itself? Are you going to tell this prospective new audience to go do their homework to properly understand how cool this setting is? You know what the response to that is going to be, righ? That's going to be big turn-off and the majority of these new players will be like, "No thanks, there's these other settings that I can just dive into without reading some outdated fiction with some questionable content".

Treat Chaosmancer as you one of these new players, sell him Greyhawk in a way that doesn't require him to drop what they're doing and essentially do reseach for your sales-pitch has any meaning to them. You have to get a potential consumer to be excited about your product without them having any prior experience if you want that product to sell.

Personally, I'd go with: "Come experience the original setting of one of D&D's creators, Gary Gygax. Greyhawk captures the quintessential experience and spirit of D&D itself. Within these lands, fraught with a merciless mad king of a crumbling empire, the demonic might of a cambion demigod, and the machinations of a secret society dedicated to enslaving all others, stand the few, wearied pillars of good and light while, still others, strive to main a balance between all of the opposing factions."

Or something to that effect.

Look, we've been trying to convince @Chaosmancer for literally pages of this thread! We've used examples like Conan, John Carter, The Witcher, Moorcock and other Sword & Sorcery pieces.

To each one, the response has been "I don't know it, and I'm not interested in learning about it."

Even worse, when we go deeper and try to explain the deeper themes and motifs of S&S, the reply has often been "I don't get the appeal," or "Why do I need GH when I can do that in the Forgotten Realms?"

I think the OP, and others on this thread, have made a compelling argument that Greyhawk is a compelling sandbox world with darker themes, a more grounded world, but maintains some classical fantasy to make it easy to pick-up-and-play.

At a certain point, we need to understand that some folks really aren't that interested in being convinced, and just like the argument itself. If you're still reading and replying to page 30 of a thread and still feign ignorance, I think that speaks volumes.

 

[Eric V]

Look, we've been trying to convince @Chaosmancer for literally pages of this thread! We've used examples like Conan, John Carter, The Witcher, Moorcock and other Sword & Sorcery pieces.

To each one, the response has been "I don't know it, and I'm not interested in learning about it."

Even worse, when we go deeper and try to explain the deeper themes and motifs of S&S, the reply has often been "I don't get the appeal," or "Why do I need GH when I can do that in the Forgotten Realms?"

I think the OP, and others on this thread, have made a compelling argument that Greyhawk is a compelling sandbox world with darker themes, a more grounded world, but maintains some classical fantasy to make it easy to pick-up-and-play.

At a certain point, we need to understand that some folks really aren't that interested in being convinced, and just like the argument itself. If you're still reading and replying to page 30 of a thread and still feign ignorance, I think that speaks volumes.

Didn't @Azzy suggest to forget about pitching it to @Chaosmancer and instead try to come up with general selling points for the potential audience at large?