D&D General 50th Anniversary WotC live panel at PAX Unplugged 2023.

[FitzTheRuke]

I guess we'll see. If it were me, I would invest time and energy in something 15 year olds might actually like.

Why do you think that 15 year olds wouldn't like Greyhawk used to walk them through making their own, or at least making their own thing out of Greyhawk?

 

[Reynard]

Why do you think that 15 year olds wouldn't like Greyhawk used to walk them through making their own, or at least making their own thing out of Greyhawk?

Because it is 2023 and the fantasy influences on those kids look absolutely, completely different than Greyhawk.

 

[Parmandur]

Why do you think that 15 year olds wouldn't like Greyhawk used to walk them through making their own, or at least making their own thing out of Greyhawk?

Yeah, exactly. The main thing Greyhawk needs to bring it up to speed is to up the diversity factor, which was partly done in the Aughts anyways.

 

[Parmandur]

Because it is 2023 and the fantasy influences on those kids look absolutely, completely different than Greyhawk.

But, do they really...? So much of the new hip fantasy material I see my kids reading is very Greyhawk influenced (that is to say, D&D-ish).

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Because it is 2023 and the fantasy influences on those kids look absolutely, completely different than Greyhawk.

Hmm. But the point (that I'd think) that the setting section in the DMG would try to get at is: Start Small. Build from there. Greyhawk is a good example of that in practice. I can't think of any of the sort of influences that you'd be talking about that would fit that idea.

Is there something specific (therefore "small") about those influences that you think would be usefull for the exercise, that couldn't be included by using Greyhawk as an example?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Yeah, exactly. The main thing Greyhawk needs to bring it up to speed is to up the diversity Doctor, which was partly done in the Aughts anyways.

I know that some Greyhawk "fans" think that the less... inclusive parts of the settings are part of what "makes it-it" but I don't subscribe to that one whit. (To be fair, I'm hardly a Greyhawk fan. I barely remember it!)

 

[Parmandur]

Hmm. But the point (that I'd think) that the setting section in the DMG would try to get at is: Start Small. Build from there. Greyhawk is a good example of that in practice. I can't think of any of the sort of influences that you'd be talking about that would fit that idea.

Is there something specific (therefore "small") about those influences that you think would be usefull for the exercise, that couldn't be included by using Greyhawk as an example?

Greyhawk as presented in 1981 is a menu of little subsettings covering different moods and genre, by design. Still going to be useful to new people today.

 

[Parmandur]

I know that some Greyhawk "fans" think that the less... inclusive parts of the settings are part of what "makes it-it" but I don't subscribe to that one whit.

As a 3.5 Greyhawk fan, that always felt silly.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Hmm. But the point (that I'd think) that the setting section in the DMG would try to get at is: Start Small. Build from there. Greyhawk is a good example of that in practice. I can't think of any of the sort of influences that you'd be talking about that would fit that idea.

Is there something specific (therefore "small") about those influences that you think would be usefull for the exercise, that couldn't be included by using Greyhawk as an example?

And as I mentioned before, they went on a bit when talking about Hommlet, which is a great example of starting small and then building from there. Thus why I think it's going to be one of the min-adventures in the DMG.

 

[Reynard]

Hmm. But the point (that I'd think) that the setting section in the DMG would try to get at is: Start Small. Build from there. Greyhawk is a good example of that in practice. I can't think of any of the sort of influences that you'd be talking about that would fit that idea.

Is there something specific (therefore "small") about those influences that you think would be usefull for the exercise, that couldn't be included by using Greyhawk as an example?

The fantasy that kids are consuming today tends not to be medieval and it tends to have a bit of cutesy weird built in. Imagine the uproar from grogs if they cutsey-weirdified Greyhawk to make it palatable to The Kids.

That's what i mean by baggage and why i think something completely new works better as an example and teaching setting for 5E 2024. They don't have to hammer any square pegs into round holes, don't have to erase any canon, and don't have to pretend perform convoluted retcons to explain why dwarves can be wizards and where dragonborn came from (or whatever).

it is true that you can do the teaching part with some location in Greyhawk or with Nentir Vale or a new setting equally effectively. but the benefits of being fresh and unencumbered and built for the audience far outweigh the perceived value of the Greyhawk or Nentir Vale brands. Obviously IMO and YMMV and all that. I just have not heard a compelling argument that suggests you can make Greyhawk current and relevant more easily and effectively than doing something new.