D&D 5E Greyhawk: Pitching the Reboot

[Snarf Zagyg]

There's a big difference between "the pcs rarely interact with magic" and "the peasants rarely interact with magic."

The latter, I would say, is barely relevant to how the game plays out.

I would have a small (very small) quibble with that.

I think that the "default" 5e is, to a certain extent ... um ... nobody cares what the peasants, or good people, or autonomous collective, are up to. It's kind of background noise- you care about the extent of magic in terms of how it affect the PCs (can they buy magic items, can they get healed or resurrected, etc.).

But most (not all) people just ignore the more general questions of whether druids help the farmers with animal husbandry, or clerics are healing the infirm, and so on.

The one major difference is if there is a campaign (such as Eberron) where the idea of "peasants" (commoners) interacting with magic is presented front and center- then it becomes very, very relevant to the game.

To put it more simply- default 5e is "no one cares too much about people other than the PCs and magic," and not-default 5e is "woah, there's a world other than the PCs, wonder how that works, exactly."

 

[Minigiant]

There's a big difference between "the pcs rarely interact with magic" and "the peasants rarely interact with magic."

The latter, I would say, is barely relevant to how the game plays out. The former is a seismic shift from how 5e DnD is presented.

It is a big difference.

The point is they are one the same scale. The scale is for the setting not the campaign.

Greyhawk is a low magic freqenvy setting because only high level nonmagical adventurers and full blown spellscsters have or see any magic.

"The pcs rarely interact with magic" isn't what D&D considers low magic in frequency. D&D's idea of low magic still has PCs encountering a lot of magic.

 

[Rob Kuntz]

Oh my days that would be awesome.

I think one major problem we have is a , how to put this “kurt cobain/John Lennon” type situation . Like the setting was an early product started in Gary’s vision. Due to circumstance, it never had a chance to develop further with its original creator. The final product frozen in time, perfected in our minds as how we viewed it then. Gary may have developed it in ways that might have caused consternation to the OG fans. It didn’t age. It didn’t sell out. It didn’t cause controversy with choices. but that is speculative.

This is a flawless, unassailable product that will only be “ruined” because someone else has done something different to it that didn’t match what you envisioned at your table.

When this type of thread appeared before, I pitched approaching a campaign setting book as a wilderlands style hex crawl folio. With limited information or setting modification. Just snippets of basic flavour text about the nations and religions, then hexes with a small paragraph in each of different things (including the placement of classic adventures). That way, it remains as it was, a sketch of a world, waiting for you to ink in the details and add colour. To my mind, it would inspire adventure, differentiate it from the other 5e products and avoid controversies around a reboot of lore.

I’d be interested in your opinion on that if you felt if it was viable or not?

Any idea is viable IF someone gets behind it, in this case "if" WotC.... This wheel will always be turned by them, remember that. I repeat myself, but it's not rocket science. WotC is market driven. They seek the median market whereat they will derive the most potential return from. I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but Fantasy, literally, is NOT a median market idea. It is infinite and thus should have infinite expression. However, the market eschews such unpredictability. The market is about the quickest throughput from A to B to C. Thus it gravitates to center, and the further you get away from center the more niche you get, and WotC IS NOT and will never be niche, of course. Therein lies the problem they see with Greyhawk, its unpredictability and as espoused vociferously by its current adherents and how this clashes with their median view. Out of the gate, just in starting, this has already positioned Greyhawk at a -1, not a good place to start if you are judging whether to invest in it and at what cost, present or future. There has to be a compromise between Greyhawk fandom in bowing to WotC's successful market model; and the pain caused must be alleviated by the best products the fandom creates to deal with it. Whether that's your product or some other's, they are all good. It's getting the horse to, and then out of, the gate that worries me the most.

 

[transmission89]

Any idea is viable IF someone gets behind it, in this case "if" WotC.... This wheel will always be turned by them, remember that. I repeat myself, but it's not rocket science. WotC is market driven. They seek the median market whereat they will derive the most potential return from. I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but Fantasy, literally, is NOT a median market idea. It is infinite and thus should have infinite expression. However, the market eschews such unpredictability. The market is about the quickest throughput from A to B to C. Thus it gravitates to center, and the further you get away from center the more niche you get, and WotC IS NOT and will never be niche, of course. Therein lies the problem they see with Greyhawk, its unpredictability and as espoused vociferously by its current adherents and how this clashes with their median view. Out of the gate, just in starting, this has already positioned Greyhawk at a -1, not a good place to start if you are judging whether to invest in it and at what cost, present or future. There has to be a compromise between Greyhawk fandom in bowing to WotC's successful market model; and the pain caused must be alleviated by the best products the fandom creates to deal with it. Whether that's your product or some other's, they are all good. It's getting the horse to, and then out of, the gate that worries me the most.

Yes, I get what you’re saying. I have my own view on how I feel wotc has taken care of the wider d&d brand and settings, but in the interest of civility, I shall keep that to myself.
I think at this stage, I’d be willing to accept any Greyhawk product release, regardless of quality (though only purchasing if I deemed it good enough) if it meant opening it up on the guild, so then fans could act as caretakers and fix it. Much like how Keith Baker (to a lesser extent) is doing with his vision of Eberron.

 

[Helldritch]

Well, those days of versatility are unfortunately gone. They were vanquished long before WotC acquired TSR. Greyhawk was versatile and a DM's sandbox; but with the breadwinners FR and DL, well these defined the path to GOLD: describe everything and leave no stone unturned. Greyhawk got literally crushed while caught between paradoxical and opposed philosophies (create vs. have it created for thee). Contributing to this was TSR's political war with Gary.

Greyhawk has to come into line with what the mode has been for a while: describe everything (and then let those who disagree sort it out on the back end). I generally do not prefer median products made for median use, so I side (as did Gary) with versatility. But the fact of a previously groomed market dictates Greyhawk's future if it ever leaves its iron-banded eyrie.

Those who like versatility for a setting are still there and we are still teaching the game as we learned it. You might be surprised at how many young players are using the old boxed set of Greyhawk in my area. Yes, I have a hand on that fact, but still. They have learned through me and my Friday Night D&D that Greyhawk exists and thanks to Goodman Games, they now have access to old editions revamped for 5ed. And I can't wait to see what they have done with ToEE. Still, the need to update Greyhawk is still there and many that purchased the boxed set on Ebay and DMGuild asked me for my extensive notes. To them I replied:" Make Greyhawk your own. You'll never have has much fun with the work of others compared to your own." To which they often reply
But what about Dragonborns? Which subclasses should we use, which ...
Answers that can be done ideally by individual DMs, yes. But the amount of work to do that is staggering. With an updated setting, these are all answered and from. There, it will be easier to go on.

I know where are all the bard's colleges are in my Greyhawk and which subclasses they teach. The same goes for monk's monasteries and which subclasses are thought at which monasteries and so on. But I have had 37 years to develop my Greyhawk, adjusting it in From the Ashes, to 3rd edition with the adventure begins and even with Gazetter. For a young DM to start fully over is a lot of work. An updated setting would do much for the Greyhawk community. I will soon turn 51, and started to DM in 1983. I have been playing for 40 years now (soon 41) and I still love Greyhawk. I am not the kind that don't want to see my setting change. I want to see it evolve. I have liked what they did with the FtA box. I liked what they did with the Adventure continues and players' guide to Greyhawk and the three part adventure with the Crypt of Lyzandred the mad was great. Even the gazetteer was welcomed.

The setting needs to see print anew to keep it being alive and well. Once we have the same basis for 5ed with a new book. We can make the setting our own and, fortunately, up-to-date. A common from which we all be able to agree upon. That is my wish.

Edit:" Added words that got left out by the autocorretor and damn big fingers and small phone keyboards...."

 

[Rob Kuntz]

Yes, I get what you’re saying. I have my own view on how I feel wotc has taken care of the wider d&d brand and settings, but in the interest of civility, I shall keep that to myself.
I think at this stage, I’d be willing to accept any Greyhawk product release, regardless of quality (though only purchasing if I deemed it good enough) if it meant opening it up on the guild, so then fans could act as caretakers and fix it. Much like how Keith Baker (to a lesser extent) is doing with his vision of Eberron.

Well, that's what the fandom is left with. If the nobility deigns come to the castle wall and throw a crust to the beggars down below. If they opened up DMsGuild much could be done and undone. If not, keep an eye on the battlements and the torches lit.

 

[Rob Kuntz]

Those who like versatility for a setting are still there and we are still teaching the game as we learned it. You might be surprised at how many young players are using the old boxed set of Greyhawk in my area. Yes, I have a hand on that fact, but still. They have learned through me and my Friday Night D&D that Greyhawk exists and thanks to Goodman Games, they now have access to old editions revamped for 5ed. And I can't wait to see what they have done with ToEE. Still, the need to update Greyhawk is still there and many that purchased the boxed set on Ebay and DMGuild asked me for my extensive notes. To them I replied:" Make Greyhawk your own. You'll never have has much fun with the work of others compared to your own." To which they often reply
But what about Dragonborns? Which subclasses should we use, which ...
Answers that can be de idea by individual DMs, yes. But the amount of work to do that is staggering. With an updated setting, these are all answered and from. There, it will be easier to go on.

I know where are all the bard's colleges are in my Greyhawk and which subclasses they teach. The same goes for monk's monasteries and which subclasses are thought at which monasteries and so on. But I have had 37 years to develop my Greyhawk, adjusting it in From the Ashes, to 3rd edition with the adventure begins and even with Gazetter. For a young DM to start fully over is a lot of work. An updated setting would do much for the Greyhawk community. I will soon turn 51, and started to DM in 1983. I have been playing for 40 years now (soon 41) and I still love Greyhawk. I am not the kind that don't want to see my setting change. I want to see it evolve. I have liked what they did with the FtA box. I liked what they did with the Adventure continues and players' guide to Greyhawk and the three part adventure with the Crypt of Lyzandred the mad was great. Even the gazetteer was welcomed.

The setting needs to see print anew to keep being alive and well. Once we have the same basis for 5ed with a new book. We can make the setting our own and, fortunately, up-to-date. A common from which we all be able to agree upon. That is my wish.

I know that versatility still exists, but from WotC's view it is an opposing market concept. They may surprise me as they did with the OGL by doing other than what they have continued to do to reinforce market share, but I don't see it in my crystal ball. I mentioned up-thread that WotC/Hasbro are on the move with D&D and FR for the movie and digital products; and this may cause them to loosen their power grip on Greyhawk as they redirect power of control to power of newfound markets. We'll see. I'm still hopeful or else I would not be here squawking about it. I am also a realist. There's some tilting going on and the pinball may yet fall into the bonus point hole!

 

[transmission89]

Well, that's what the fandom is left with. If the nobility deigns come to the caste wall and throw a crust to the beggars down below. If they opened up DMsGuild much could be done and undone. If not, keep an eye on the battlements and the torches lit.

Yes, it’s just getting them to it. And it’s the cyclical argument that frustrates.

a) we arent going to publish greyhawk because there’s no demand for it.
b) Because there are no greyhawk products, I have nothing to buy to show demand for it as I already have the old materials.

This continues in a loop until the viable consumers age out. Then.
a) We aren’t going to publish greyhawk because there’s no demand for it. All the old people have the products so what’s the point?
b) Hi, I’m young and new to the hobby, what’s this Greyhawk? These old looking PODs? This doesn’t look as good as the new shiny, plus, I already got me some knights on horseback with forgotten realms.
c) see, there is no demand for it, so there’s no point in publishing it.

Frustrating is an understatement....

 

[Helldritch]

I know that versatility still exists, but from WotC's view it is an opposing market concept. They may surprise me as they did with the OGL by doing other than what they have continued to do to reinforce market share, but I don't see it in my crystal ball. I mentioned up-thread that WotC/Hasbro are on the move with D&D and FR for the movie and digital products; and this may cause them to loosen their power grip on Greyhawk as they redirect power of control to power of newfound markets. We'll see. I'm still hopeful or else I would not be here squawking about it. I am also a realist. There's some tilting going on and the pinball may yet fall into the bonus point hole!

If the guild opens, I will be one of their biggest buyer, that's for sure. Yet I am also a realist. What I hope for is far from being a sure thing, but hope costs nothing and I still have my own material, and if it comes down to that, I might just copy my notes down for my fellow young GMs out there in my area and give them all of what I have written over the years.

Yes, it’s just getting them to it. And it’s the cyclical argument that frustrates.

a) we arent going to publish greyhawk because there’s no demand for it.
b) Because there are no greyhawk products, I have nothing to buy to show demand for it as I already have the old materials.

This continues in a loop until the viable consumers age out. Then.
a) We aren’t going to publish greyhawk because there’s no demand for it. All the old people have the products so what’s the point?
b) Hi, I’m young and new to the hobby, what’s this Greyhawk? These old looking PODs? This doesn’t look as good as the new shiny, plus, I already got me some knights on horseback with forgotten realms.
c) see, there is no demand for it, so there’s no point in publishing it.

Frustrating is an understatement....

Yep, that is a darn circular logic that we have there. I sure hope that this circular argument gets broken soon.

 

[Rob Kuntz]

Yes, it’s just getting them to it. And it’s the cyclical argument that frustrates.

a) we arent going to publish greyhawk because there’s no demand for it.
b) Because there are no greyhawk products, I have nothing to buy to show demand for it as I already have the old materials.

This continues in a loop until the viable consumers age out. Then.
a) We aren’t going to publish greyhawk because there’s no demand for it. All the old people have the products so what’s the point?
b) Hi, I’m young and new to the hobby, what’s this Greyhawk? These old looking PODs? This doesn’t look as good as the new shiny, plus, I already got me some knights on horseback with forgotten realms.
c) see, there is no demand for it, so there’s no point in publishing it.

Frustrating is an understatement....

Well, if it's a "worthless" product then why hold onto it? You see, their bluff is easily called: Do a KS to raise a couple million or so and offer to buy WOG from them. They'd say no to that and the jig would be up, their act exposed. It's a prisoner in the Tower of London; and we all know, from history, what happened to all prisoners in that tower...