Do you want Greyhawk updated to 5e?

[Ralif Redhammer]

I’d certainly love to see Greyhawk updated for 5e. And heck, maybe say that there aren’t Tieflings or Dragonborn. But I don’t think putting them in harms the Greyhawk-ness of it.

The original Greyhawk Folio is pretty rules-empty, so one could just use it mostly as-is. But a 5e Greyhawk that accounts for the history that’s happened since, throws some new twists in, some new Backgrounds and subclasses (a thief-acrobat, maybe even the old proposed-but-unseen mountebank, for example), and new spells from Tenser, Bigby, and co, and I’d be darn happy.

But really, before that happens, I'd think that a full FR campaign setting has to come first…

 

[Bacon Bits]

I don't think that Greyhawk needs anything along the lines of the SCAG, but I'd like to see something like a small print-on-demand document like the Elemental Evil Player's Companion. Like a 5e Companion for the World of Greyhawk Fantasy Game Setting. List the suggested playable races, the gods and their suggested domains, include the major lore, etc. They could even split it and do part of the "book" (using the term loosely) with World of Greyhawk, part of the book with From the Ashes, and part of the book with Living Greyhawk events. They're already selling digital versions of essentially all the old modules. While I don't think there needs to be anything that extends Greyhawk (I prefer to use the original WoG boxed set still), it would be nice if they did something to encourage players to seek out the digital products that WotC intends players to be using. Heck, why not bundle it with the digital Greyhawk products (WoG boxed set, Greyhawk Adventures, From the Ashes boxed set, etc.).

I suppose they could do something in Dragon+, but... I don't think I know anybody who reads that or uses it. At least, compared to Unearthed Arcana, it's all but unheard of. Granted, they've only had two dozen issues in nearly 5 years. Back in 3e I knew multiple people subscribed to Dungeon and Dragon. I think the death of those two periodicals was the worst thing about 4e, and WotC certainly paid for it by turning Paizo into a direct competitor.

 

[Charlaquin]

The more settings have official support, the better IMO.

 

[Demetrios1453]

So I was reading the Sinister Secret of Ghosts of Saltmarsh thread, and I saw that many people were complaining because, yet again, WoTC were mining the glorious history of Greyhawk ... and were probably just going to toss it into a generic Forgotten Realms location. (Note- this is not confirmed, but this is the internet, and what else would we do with our time if we couldn't complain about things that haven't happened yet?).

Actually, it has already happened, and in just the opposite way than you've supposed - this Saltmarsh will still be on the Azure Sea in Greyhawk, confirmed by the product description as well as the Kate Welsh interview. It will, however, contain suggestions on where to place it elsewhere though.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Draegn]

Another setting and place book to pick and choose things I like from as needed does not hurt.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Plaguescarred]

I'd love 5E Greyhawk setting just seeing Anna B Meyer's Map of the Flanaess 2019 Edition the other day got me all excited!

 

[cmad1977]

Eh. Don’t need a ‘generic fantasy setting’ updated or covered. There’s nothing special to me about Greyhawk except nostalgia.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Because it doesn't matter. I don't understand why people have the need to update the setting. It's not Eberron or Dark Sun where you need new rules that are 5e-specific.

More bluntly, the things that remain special about Greyhawk as a setting are the things most likely to get screwed up if they get touched again. In other words, Greyhawk isn't FR, and I'd rather it just be mentioned in passing than have it turned into that.

But that's just my opinion, and I created the poll and the thread to see what other people thought. Because I am not the KING OF EVERYONE! .... yet.

I do agree about that, but the problem with just saying “the old stuff is good enough” is that it’s not readily available. Yes, it’s on eBay, and digital copies from Drive Thru RPG, but that’s different. Not to mention many people won’t get it if it’s not 5e.

There are some rules in most of the books, but a repackaging of a “legacy” setting might be an interesting approach. Although even with Greyhawk, which do you pick? And many would complain that it’s just a reprint.

Another factor, that you touched on, is that Greyhawk is the ultimate DIY setting. I agree, especially in the early years, but the entire framework and support of the game was set up for that sort of thing. The adventures notated locations in Greyhawk, but rarely had a close tie to it that altered the lore for the setting. Dragon magazine basically promoted the approach of making the game your own, since the bulk of it was deemed “unofficial” and there were all sorts of homebrew variations for rules, lore, classes, monsters, etc.

While there is some of that discussion, in the DMG along with the promotion of things on DMsGuild in Dragon+, it’s different than when full articles appeared instead of just saying, “this is good,” and when the DM designed campaign/world was the default. On the one hand, it’s a golden age of homebrew now, but on the other hand there’s almost too much. And while the quality wasn’t always great in Dragon, at least it was chosen, edited, and presented in a consistent and digestible way. The current approach is more of a product review.

So I don’t necessarily disagree, but there seems to be a consistent group complaining that everything is in the FR and they need to release other settings too. I really dislike the way they’ve homogenized the settings over the years, although part of that is how they also dump everything into the Realms. I fully expect it to happen if they release a Greyhawk setting in any capacity, but Ill be even more disappointed if they dump Dragonborn and tieflings, among other things, into Greyhawk.