Are the Scarlet bro's and Iuz holding GREYHAWK back?

[AFGNCAAP]

I think Greyhawk has too much of a history for some fans, much as Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms now have (compared to back when they were the respective "Eberrons" of their day). I think it's this notion that gets in the way for veteran players to support the game (which, IMHO, I think is key, since good example veteran players can help bring new players into the game).

I think Greyhawk would benefit from complete reinvention to appeal to newer players, but that reinvention would drive away a fair amount of veteran players who enjoyed the setting as it is (or as it was--IMHO, I think the deviation of Greyhawk during the past few years helped hasten its decline as a regularly-supported setting).

Then again, I can understand the desire to make Greyhawk the generic "default" setting of the game. New players may use bits and pieces of Greyhawk in their homebrews, or create a version of Greyhawk that suits their needs. Nice as this is, I'd prefer Greyhawk stuck around, but that it was pulled out as a seperate "default example" for players/DMs to use.

As for Iuz and the Scarlet Brotherhood, I think that Iuz should ascend and remain off of the mortal plane, and that the Brotherhood should be reinvented a bit. The Brotherhood doesn't quite feel like the omnipresent villainous threat that I think they could be (like the Zhentarim or Emerald Claw). And, the threat of Cthulu Chaos The Snarl Tharizdun seems rather stale as well. I'm not saying toss Tharizdun out altogether, but I'd rather have him be a sort of "anti-divine" being (with ur-priests instead of clerics), or maybe have knowledge of Tharizdun be lost to all (Tharizdun seems like a nice secret for Vecna to covet).

Then again, I think the older established settings could benefit from some of the new takes that crop up in Eberron: the action point mechanic and pantheon worship for clerics, for example.

 

[Gez]

Well, why should Greyhawk move?

There are, as this thread shows, two types of DMs: those who dislike metaplots and want a static canvas where all that happens will be what they want to happen; and those who like metaplots and want a dynamic world where things are happening even when the players aren't looking.

Both opinions are valid, both types of setting have their assets and flaws. And WotC provides both.

The Forgotten Realms are the typical example of metaplot-heavy setting. Maybe too heavy, even. Greyhawk, on the other hand, is completely static. Eberron, the young cadet, seems to be a static setting for now, but who can tell if it will last? Contrarily to Greyhawk, Eberron is new so there is still room for geographical expansion. Greyhawk has, in the past, been covered pretty much exhaustively, so expansion would be chronological now -- unless, and it's possible, WotC would reprint old information... But they seem to prefer pushing forward Eberron and FR, as the two visions of D&D, and keep Greyhawk-light as the underdeveloped "vanilla" setting.

 

[Emirikol]

I've kind of tired of deities being "the plot." Sure, there's a lot of them (heck, Russ Taylor and i catalogued them all in the olden days of the first death of GH), but using gods as plots has become stale. It's like saying your bad guy doesn't have any motive, he's just insane. Well, once the players find out which deity it is, then it's all over but the dyin'.

That's just personal taste though like all of this.

I agree with earlier posters. WotC needs to sell GH to a 3rd party rather than just sit on it.

jh

 

[Imaro]

I don't think the dissapearance of Iuz or the SB will pull new players in. I think the biggest thing that hurt Greyhawk was the way WotC went about publishing it and promoting it. I mean I'm not trying to offend anyone who liked the LGG, but come on it looks amateurish...especially when compared to FRCS and ECS. For $26.95 I get a b&w, softcover w/b&w(horrible) art at 196??pages

or for $39.95 I get a full color, hardcover w/cool art at 320pgs

WotC never planned on Greyhawk striking it big...there's no way with the lackluster effort they put into it's lead book. Until that changes no amount of modifications to the setting is going to attract new players when the others are way better designed & marketed.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

What ongoing D&D campaign world hasn't been updated and evolved? Thinking that a campaign world should be frozen in status so DMs won't ever have to worry about canon material contradicting their own seems like a silly position to me.

 

[Klaus]

Well, why should Greyhawk move?

There are, as this thread shows, two types of DMs: those who dislike metaplots and want a static canvas where all that happens will be what they want to happen; and those who like metaplots and want a dynamic world where things are happening even when the players aren't looking.

Both opinions are valid, both types of setting have their assets and flaws. And WotC provides both.

The Forgotten Realms are the typical example of metaplot-heavy setting. Maybe too heavy, even. Greyhawk, on the other hand, is completely static. Eberron, the young cadet, seems to be a static setting for now, but who can tell if it will last? Contrarily to Greyhawk, Eberron is new so there is still room for geographical expansion. Greyhawk has, in the past, been covered pretty much exhaustively, so expansion would be chronological now -- unless, and it's possible, WotC would reprint old information... But they seem to prefer pushing forward Eberron and FR, as the two visions of D&D, and keep Greyhawk-light as the underdeveloped "vanilla" setting.

Greyhawk has more room for geographical expansion than pretty much any other TSR setting this side of Dark Sun. I mean, the Flanaess is the northeastern portion of a continent. What's to the south? More Hepmonaland/Amedio? And beyond the Bright Desert? And to the Far West? What's beyond the eastern sea?

Eberron came out of the gate with a world map showing all continents (Khorvaire, Sarlona, Argonessen, Xen'drik, Frostfell and Aerenal). Has Greyhawk had that?

 

[Schmoe]

FWIW, I love the SB and iuz. They are some of my favorite aspects of the setting and are part of the quintessential GH experience. YMMV, but I feel the setting would be lessened without them.

I agree with this. As someone who only really looked into GH in the last 4 years, I found the setting reinvigorating and refreshing, because it was set up with big, bad, evil empires that could actually do something against the fractured duchies and minor kingdoms arrayed against them. It has Iuz, it has the Scarlet Brotherhood, it has the Pomarj, it has the Sea of Dust... it's a place that can support pretty much any style of campaign that I want to run, and it all seems to hang together very well.

I would be disappointed if Greyhakw became a "changing canon" style of world. I don't want to feel like I need to keep up with the Joneses', I want a setting that provides a common ground.

 

[Ulrick]

I agree with this. As someone who only really looked into GH in the last 4 years, I found the setting reinvigorating and refreshing, because it was set up with big, bad, evil empires that could actually do something against the fractured duchies and minor kingdoms arrayed against them. It has Iuz, it has the Scarlet Brotherhood, it has the Pomarj, it has the Sea of Dust... it's a place that can support pretty much any style of campaign that I want to run, and it all seems to hang together very well.

These are some of the main reasons I've DMed Greyhawk for three different campaigns (one lasting 10 years) since I started playing D&D 18+ years ago.

I like Greyhawk because it gives a DM a barebones description of a world and lets him run with it. Everything isn't all explained like Forgotten Realms. I've tried playing and running FR but it just seems like I'm interfering in somebody elses creation. Yeah, sure, I'm the DM and can do whatever I want, but I've found that its difficult to run a realms game without feeling contradictory or having some player (this was more true a few years ago) say, "You can't do that. That's not what's in such and such story or book." That, and I'm tired of Drizzt, and Gandalf...I mean Elminster.

Yeah, Iuz maybe a Sauron rip-off, but Iuz isn't just a floating eye!
He's the Lord of Pain! and isn't a monolithic evil like Sauron. I think Greyhawk as a setting could survive and maintain its "sword & sorcery" feel if Iuz vanished/died.

But, to each his or her own.

 

[Mortellan]

What was that bit about Eastfair and orcs being 'G'? I'm confused.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

What was that bit about Eastfair and orcs being 'G'? I'm confused.

Yes, you are confused. I think it was that the "G"-nature of the game prevents discussing what should really be done to the orcs in Eastfair.