D&D 5E Greyhawk: Pitching the Reboot

[dave2008]

I don't think classes need to change or be demagicked to do Greyhawk. Greyhawk is more low level than low magic.

However, what @Snarf Zagyg is talking about is to make Greyhawk something unique and interesting to the GoT and Witcher segment. Personally, I find the idea of D&D setting designed to be low magic (like AiME) very interesting. I would like to see rules, guidelines, and restrictions in a book that makes something other than the kitchen sink approach of FR and Eberron. I think that is interesting.

 

[dave2008]

I'm just like INCREDIBLY skeptical that your 14-year-old son is going to be into grimdark low-magic Greyhawk which all about politics and so on, as has been suggested in this thread. This whole "WOO LOW MAGIC" thing is pretty hilarious in the context of Attack on Titan, too. I don't see Geralt flashing across cities via grappling hooks in order to chop up strangely pliable giants with unfathomably sharp swords.

Dude, why does the idea of a low magic setting upset you so much?! You seem to be taking this way to personally.

 

[dave2008]

I don't buy the low magic Greyhawk argument. The Rain of Colorless Fire...

I think he was pitching as rebooting it as a low-magic setting. Not that it was one. That is the pitch to resurrect the setting.

 

[fearsomepirate]

I'm really struggling with your assertion that this is "Greyhawk"

Can't imagine what else to call it. For now, "Greyhawk" works.

and your earlier one that NPCs above 10th level are rarer than other settings (such as Forgotten Realms):

In typical 5e FR adventures, a 10th-level Fighter is often nothing more than an errand-boy for more important people. Regardless of what any internal document on FR class & level demographics at WotC might say, the game does very little to reinforce that a 10th level Fighter is anything more than a common mook.

If you want someone to feel special, it takes more than writing, 'You are special' at the top of the character sheet.

 

[dave2008]

... it is difficult to do low magic with D&D especially with 5e...

Why do you say that? I think 5e is best version of D&D to do in a low magic setting. Magic is simply not needed to play the game, that is a change from most editions.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I think those are good ideas and you pitch it well, @Snarf Zagyg , but at the risk of being a party-pooper, I just don't see why WotC would want to resuscitate Greyhawk - except for, perhaps, a one-off anniversary box set. I don't think it has contemporary appeal, and if they want to explore some of the themes you mention--namely, a low-fantasy setting more akin to Howard than Tolkien--I think there are better ways to do that, or at least with potentially wider appeal. I think a commemorative love letter to classic Greyhawk in a one-off deluxe product is a better bet than a re-envisioning of a very 1970s world in 2020s trappings.

So, as I mentioned in another thread, there were two ways to handle Greyhawk (IMO):

Two solutions-

1. Re-issue the old stuff. Just some sort of fancy "collector set" with reprinted big ol' Darlene Maps and charge a ton of money. It won't attract the new gamers, but will keep the olds happy, and would "celebrate" the setting. Of course, it will also result in the death of it ... given the lack of new gamers playing it, but still!

2. Make something good.

To expand on that-

Sure, Hasbro can always make a super-deluxe edition for the 50th anniversary and sell it for lots of money. Just include a fancy big ol' version of the Darlene map and the original, pre-85 info, and that will make the majority of the grognards super happy. If you include some sort of supplement that includes and expands on the 3e timeline and lore in a well-done manner (without trampling on the Gygax "core") then you've got, what, 95% of old-school Greyhawk fans on board?

But then it's done. And, tbh, that does a disservice both to young D&D fans, and to Hasbro. Let me explain.

Imagine if, in the late 80s, Paramount had said, "Sure, people liked the old Star Trek. But who really cares any more? Let's just keep milking the olds with Spock ears. Don't bother rebooting it. Who would care about a New Generation?" Well, they would have lost some valuable IP and history. Not to mention an entire streaming service (seriously, CBS All Access and Paramount+ are basically carried by Star Trek and 90s nostalgia.... SHUT UP BEAVIS!).

Greyhawk is the ur-setting for D&D (yeah, yeah, Blackmoor, City State). To lose Greyhawk is to lose an invaluable piece of D&D history. From the names of so many spells (however stupid, MELF) to items and artifacts, to famous historical people- it's all there. I think it's great that we have young fans coming in and putting their own stamp on the game; but many of them also love re-discovering the roots, and understanding where it all came from.

As such, a rebooted Greyhawk, one that carried bits of the past forward while being attractive (in whatever way) to a newer generation, would be beneficial to the game. To the IP owners and the fans. A way to reconnect the past and the present.

 

[fearsomepirate]

I think these are orthogonal concerns. You can have a game where a 5th level magic user is an uncommon thing, and yet the PCs still get to high level fairly quickly; the characters are simply achieving their heroic potential. (That's the point of the PCs are special.)

If every single character you draw up effortlessly gets to 5th level in about 10 days of adventuring, then it doesn't matter if the DM has a paragraph of flavor text in a guide, read once when he introduced the setting three years ago, insisting that such people are quite rare. Your experience is that a 5th-level character is "anyone who left home for two weeks." That's the point of "show, don't tell."

 

[dave2008]

The other issue is "low magic". I don't think D&D handles that well at all, and whilst you can go with "the PCs are special", it tends to work against darker fantasy because it can make the PCs seem like superheroes even more than D&D usually does.

With regard to 5e, why do think this. 5e, IMO, handles low magic games very well. You can play the game just wonderfully with all martial characters. In fact, I suggest the game might even work better if you do!

 

[TwoSix]

If every single character you draw up effortlessly gets to 5th level in about 10 days of adventuring, then it doesn't matter if the DM has a paragraph of flavor text in a guide, read once when he introduced the setting three years ago, insisting that such people are quite rare. Your experience is that a 5th-level character is "anyone who left home for two weeks." That's the point of "show, don't tell."

I don't agree that's particularly important. And if the individual group feels it is, it's simple to introduce by modifying the advancement rules. Just put the sidebar in the setting book.

 

[Mort]

Can't imagine what else to call it. For now, "Greyhawk" works.

Sure, I have those too.

But my point was, nothing is baked in to low level adventuring. Plenty of Greyhawk modules that go well above level 10.

In typical 5e FR adventures, a 10th-level Fighter is often nothing more than an errand-boy for more important people. Regardless of what any internal document on FR class & level demographics at WotC might say, the game does very little to reinforce that a 10th level Fighter is anything more than a common mook.

If you want someone to feel special, it takes more than writing, 'You are special' at the top of the character sheet.

I don't disagree on the "feel" of it. I totally agree that by 10th level (or well before actually) PCs shouldn't be mooks of any kind. But that wasn't what I was quibbling about - it was the assertion that 10+ leveled characters (and NPCs) were extraordinarily rare.