Campaign Classics is coming back!

[JoeGKushner]

LOL! Well, we proved that proverb right.

... and that's what's missing in Eberron -- A hollow world!!!

Man, that's such a fantastic idea and fits the whole Pulp Action feel so well!

Someone start another thread demanding a Hollow World in Eberron article from Keith for Dragon magazine!

 

[qstor]

I'm confused. I thought 3.0+ default setting was Grayhawk. i.e. anything that didn't specificaly say Forgotten Relams or Eberron was G.H. I mean WotC's PrCs, like Fist of Hextor, use G.H. names. I even had a narrow-minded GM refuse the use of some PrCs because they mention G.H. organizations or gods since he doesn't use the G.H. world. (He can't seem to make the leap of "cut and pasting" other names for his campaign world.) And then doesn't Poly or Dragon have a regular Living Grayhawk seciton?

Its supposed to be the default setting for 3.0+. Folks have called it "Greyhawk Lite" There's been no in dept development of the setting since the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer and WOTC has left it to the RPGA and Living Greyhawk to develop.

The problem is the vast majority of the material including modules and fluff developed for the campaign is not available to the public. Events outside the regions aren't generally known outside the region or "people in the know" that play/run Living Greyhawk. And it's been 5 years into the campaign and WOTC isn't going to publish anything that has Greyhawk with the name on it. They have a new setting and Eberron is its name. I asked Charles Ryan at Winter Fantasy if WOTC ever planned to publish a Greyhawk hardback and the answer was "no" and basically we're supporting Eberron now.

As for the Living Greyhawk Journal, its in limbo. Gary Holian one of the authors of the LGG commented on the Greytalk chat that WOTC wasn't too happy with continuing the articles. So the articles are either on the web or not published at all. Or stuffed into Dungeon via Erik Mona with no official Living Greyhawk content in the articles like the Sterich write up attached to the recent series of modules, thus authors in the campaign can't use it in modules and as far as WOTC is concerned its not official.

*steps off soapbox*

Mike

 

[Alzrius]

You know, I remember reading that part of the letter column and just thinking that it'd be one small article a year. Looking back at it, it makes much more sense that they mean it as an annual monthly theme for the magazine. This is great news! Booyeah!

While I have campaigns that I like more than others, I'll be happy with, quite frankly, anything we get, so long as it's done well (e.g. doesn't feel the need to alter the setting in tone).

Paizo people, two words for this annual theme: WEB ENHANCEMENTS! You're going to have more material than you know what to do with (the previous editor of Dragon said so himself in the #315 editorial), and likewise, the readership will be screaming for more than you can possibly deliver in one issue. Add into that that web enhancements of this sort will probably lure more people into buying the issue, and that they don't have space limitations, and how can you go wrong? Please think seriously about web enhancing the campaign classics!

 

[Razz0putin]

I'd love them to cut the regular Flaws feature down by a few pages (yes, they say they're cutting back on the flaws -- cut down on that section anyway) and stick a Campaign Classic in every issue.

I second that. although the character options are interesting I don't begin to run enough characters to use them all now campaign classics I can use.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

This looks like great news. It reminds me of all the great reasons I used to buy Dragon.

 

[Gez]

I asked Charles Ryan at Winter Fantasy if WOTC ever planned to publish a Greyhawk hardback and the answer was "no" and basically we're supporting Eberron now.

Since Paizo has started publishing books... This look like the only possibility for a Greyhawk hardcover.

 

[Ranger REG]

Personally, I would love to see Dark Sun done well but that's not going to happen so soon after the Paizo botch-up of it in Dungeon and Dragon. However, I can hope, can't I?

Yeah, as much as a Miss Universe contestant can hope for world peace.

(This boards lack a "rolleyes" smiley. :\ )

 

[Akrasia]

I don't normally read Dragon, so could someone elaborate on:

... For those who don't remember this issue, it essentially had an article on almost every setting WOTC/TSR has ever produced. It gave us the return of Zargon, the tortle, and defilier magic, among other things.
...

Was this just a short summary of different settings (a quick article on Birthright, Mystara, etc)?

And what is the current plan? To provide useable campaign settings? Or just more short summaries (maybe with 3e notes for people with the original material)?

In short, is this really something that exciting for a real campaign? Or just a nifty nostalgia read on the train?

I might be interested in new Mystara stuff -- but the way in which the 2e 'revisions' of the setting completely ruined it (Monte Cook's craptastic work on Glantri especially stands out), I am not optimistic... :\

 

[Alzrius]

Was this just a short summary of different settings (a quick article on Birthright, Mystara, etc)? \

That's the gist of it. Because they were trying to cover pretty much every campaign, what we got was a quick article updating some aspect of each (which was what they promised, and more than enough for me). We got the 3.5E update of the tortle race, a base class for the Sha'ir, martial arts style feats for characters from Kara-Tur, a new (and quite different) system for defiler magic, etc.

In short, is this really something that exciting for a real campaign? Or just a nifty nostalgia read on the train?

A nifty nostalgia read is something exciting for a real campaign, at least I think so. Even devoting an entire issue to just one campaign setting wouldn't be enough to do an accurate update of an old world to 3.5E. Giving us vignette-style articles is probably the best format, and I think it worked well.

 

[Orius]

I I mean WotC's PrCs, like Fist of Hextor, use G.H. names. I even had a narrow-minded GM refuse the use of some PrCs because they mention G.H. organizations or gods since he doesn't use the G.H. world. (He can't seem to make the leap of "cut and pasting" other names for his campaign world.)

So? I don't use the Greyhawk specific stuff in my homebrew either, since I don't use Greyhawk. And which PrCs are allowed is the DM's call.