Does Wizards want Greyhawk to fail?

[carmachu]

I believe WotC actually really wanted Greyhawk to succeed. They've bent over backwards to put stuff out for it because they like it, and perhaps they've listened to the more shrill voices on the internet that led them to believe that the market in general wanted it.

BS.

Again, WHAT products? You can count THREE products through the 3.X run, 2 early and one late.....

They did NOT bend over backwards. At all. I keep hearing this myth that WotC did, but the reality is clear on the shelves...20+ books for each of the other two settings....and exactly ONE hardcover for GH.

PLease folks, stop with the nonsesne the WotC supported it. They didnt, at all. I have no idea if they wanted to kill it or its a conspirocy or whatever....but support was lacking. Thats easy to see.

 

[heirodule]

What I think is funny is that if WotC started to release Greyhawk material on the same level as Eberron or Forgetten Realms, a lot of its fans would cry out in defiance of how their setting was being changed or developed in ways they didn't like. I was under the impression that part of the appeal of Greyhawk as a setting was that it just gave a framework where individual groups could fill things in on their own - at least relative to other settings.

They could do it "Secrets of Xen'drik" style. Which is kinda what the glossography was.

 

[Moggthegob]

GH is IMO a superiour setting becus Greyhawk to me nad many others IS DND and Fr and Eberron are just little breaks from the real deal.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I think it's important for D&D to have a generic/default setting, and IMHO Greyhawk is better for this than FR or Eberron.

I think my main problem with the talk of GH, is that folks paint it as "generic" too often. The flavor elements of GH were present and plentiful (though, the names lack...) and really for me, FR was always the more "generic". All the good guys are good, the bad guys are bad, the elves are all the same, etc.

That's of course over simplified, but I think the Invoked Devastation was more important to GH than the Karsus/ Anauroch thing. I guess it just depends on which one you identify with.

Either way, both overlap a bit too much to have both active, though I seriously doubt the fans overlap a whole lot. Eberron is a great setting, but it's totally different flavor.

 

[Erik Mona]

Erik Mona worked at WOTC during all of that, and the 2nd edition revival was pre-hasbro. LG was also set up under Adkison watch.

Neither Erik Mona nor Adkison were at WOTC when it was described as a legacy setting.

Psst. You're forgetting Lisa Stevens.

--Erik

 

[Thurbane]

I think my main problem with the talk of GH, is that folks paint it as "generic" too often. The flavor elements of GH were present and plentiful (though, the names lack...) and really for me, FR was always the more "generic". All the good guys are good, the bad guys are bad, the elves are all the same, etc.

That's of course over simplified, but I think the Invoked Devastation was more important to GH than the Karsus/ Anauroch thing. I guess it just depends on which one you identify with.

Either way, both overlap a bit too much to have both active, though I seriously doubt the fans overlap a whole lot. Eberron is a great setting, but it's totally different flavor.

Perhaps generic is the wrong term. I agree, Greyhawk has rich history and personages. I still think it makes a better default setting than FR or Eberron.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Erik Mona worked at WOTC during all of that,

So what? You think his swinging cod was enough to scare the Greyhawk-killers off only until he left? Garbage.

 

[Desdichado]

BS.

Again, WHAT products? You can count THREE products through the 3.X run, 2 early and one late.....

They did NOT bend over backwards. At all. I keep hearing this myth that WotC did, but the reality is clear on the shelves...20+ books for each of the other two settings....and exactly ONE hardcover for GH.

Perhaps you're missing from your count all the core books which are rife with Greyhawkisms. All the Dungeon and Dragon articles that were all about Greyhawk.

The current edition of D&D is thoroughly saturated with Greyhawk. So yeah, I call BS on YOUR claim.

PLease folks, stop with the nonsesne the WotC supported it. They didnt, at all. I have no idea if they wanted to kill it or its a conspirocy or whatever....but support was lacking. Thats easy to see.

Uh, no. The exact opposite is easy to see.

 

[Desdichado]

Perhaps generic is the wrong term. I agree, Greyhawk has rich history and personages. I still think it makes a better default setting than FR or Eberron.

Why? Because YOU like it better?

 

[billd91]

Perhaps you're missing from your count all the core books which are rife with Greyhawkisms.

Core books had very few Greyhawkisms, actually. Sure, one expects a certain number of things to crop up, particularly focused on the default list of gods from the PH. But all of that is a far cry from committed support. I certainly would have expected more support for the "default" setting than that.

All the Dungeon and Dragon articles that were all about Greyhawk.

Published mainly by Paizo. So, WotC's support for GH after 3.0 came out was pretty paltry. But Paizo's was dynamite thanks to GH partisans running the show. but now that outlet is gone.

I won't come out and say WotC wanted GH to fail, but I think their attempts at support were quite weak. Their big revival push started about 2 years before 3.0 was released. I don't know how well those products did (I suspect they didn't do that well), but any promise they might have had would have been significantly undercut by 3.0's release anyway.