D&D (2024) Greyhawk Confirmed. Tell Me Why.

[Paul Farquhar]

Don't forget that "new players" may include people who are new to D&D but not RPGs in general, people who are new to DMing but not to D&D, people who are new to building a setting but not D&D, and people who are seasoned worldbuilders but not used to worldbuilding for D&D

None of these are significant in number compared to new players and people new to DMing.

And they don’t need a lesson anyway.

One of D&D’s biggest problems is a shortage of DMs. Presenting world building as something that requires a lot of work is the last thing WotC needs to be doing.

 

[Parmandur]

So, Ten Speed Press juat announced a new art and lore book covering the different Settings of D&D, narrated in character by Mordenkainen, see these pages, including a cat person PC with Mordenkainen:

 

[TiQuinn]

So, Ten Speed Press juat announced a new art and lore book covering the different Settings of D&D, narrated in character by Mordenkainen, see these pages, including a cat person PC with Mordenkainen:

View attachment 364286View attachment 364287

I love the overland map of White Plume Mountain soooo much.

 

[RedSquirrel]

B/X and BECMI started talking about 10 and up and 12 and up and that's when that corny commercial of some dad running it for a bunch of junior high kids came out too. But BECMI and B/X were relatively minor cadet lines; AD&D was the main product, and it clearly was not aimed at 12 year olds until at least second edition. And even then, it wasn't aimed at them, it was merely hoped that they would pick it up but then continue playing as adults.

So, sure. if you discount sources where your statements aren't true, then your statements are accurate. But, let's skip the discounting of the entire Basic D&D line (1977-1991).
For your consideration: ... from the covers of AD&D 1e, not 2e.
You're right. It's not aimed at 12-year-olds.
It was aimed at ten-year-olds (and above).

From AD&D DMG, PH, ('78-'79) and MMII ('83) as general samples.

 

[Parmandur]

So, sure. if you discount sources where your statements aren't true, then your statements are accurate. But, let's skip the discounting of the entire Basic D&D line (1977-1991).
For your consideration: ... from the covers of AD&D 1e, not 2e.
You're right. It's not aimed at 12-year-olds.
It was aimed at ten-year-olds (and above).
View attachment 364288
From AD&D DMG, PH, and MMII ('78-'79) as general samples.

So, right, basically forever. The original playtest group in Gygax home was even all ages!

 

[Parmandur]

It looks like the book will have 32 pages just on Greyhawk, in addition to Mystara, Dragonlance, the Forgotten Realms and Eberron:

 

[Faolyn]

Also, I do want to point out, we don't have the book, or the chapter yet. I can only make wild guesses about how they are going to start. Will they start with a blank terrain map, then point out civilizations built based on that terrain? Will they start with the gods and churches and have that lead into politics and trade routes? Will they talk about the various species and their connections first? I don't know. Any of those COULD work.

...that was my point to begin with.

I've never even attempted to claim one is better than the other, so you can cut that line of argument off at the root.

I didn't claim you did.

Now, I think your real question is more in line we "why shouldn't we use a new setting" but you also keep giving off this feeling that using an old setting has some downsides.

You would be wrong on both thoughts here, so everything in your next paragraph is incorrect. Also kind of strange, because the writer/worldbuilder who was creating this hypothetical chapter would be writing and editing, and having other editors going over the chapter, probably multiple times before publishing, so of course it wouldn't be like a video--and I almost never watch gaming videos; I much prefer text.

Well, you're correct in that I feel using an old setting would have a downside, and that downside would be it would make many new DMs compare their homebrew attempts to a published setting that has had up to 50 years of work going into it (Greyhawk is a lot more than just the village of Hommlet and it's surroundings, after all). There are going to be a lot of prospective DMs who spend one or more hours following the directions, only to be disillusioned when they think they're going to have to do that a hundred more times to get their own version of Greyhawk or the Realms or whatever other setting they like.

Whereas with a new setting--even if this setting is never used for adventures or anything and is purely for this chapter--that baggage won't exist.

The point of this particular hypothetical chapter isn't nostalgia or to have the writers show off their personal settings (which then would get yoinked by WotC), but to teach new worldbuilders.

Also, the bit you wrote, about the dragon-sun and the vampires from the moon? That would actually be a good sidebar in this chapter. Not to build a world around those ideas, but to say "It's OK to to toss out the lore from the MM in order to do cool things in your setting." Because there are too many people who think you have to stick exactly with what the books say and are crippling their ability to have truly unique worlds because of that.

 

[TiQuinn]

It looks like the boom will have32 pages just on Greyhawk, in addition to Mystara, Dragonlance, the Forgotten Realms and Eberron:

View attachment 364295

That looks a lot more interesting to me than the Legends and Lore book they just came out with.

 

[RedSquirrel]

Sorry, yes. I realize that he started working on Greyhawk as his personal setting, like Blackmoore was Arneson's. I was referring to creating this specific product. But he did not include most of the content from his home setting into the published product. He initially didn't think that a highly detailed setting that spelled everything out was what DMs were looking for. You don't have to take my word for it, Gary discussed it in in threads on ENworld.

No one's debating whether any particular product was created for a demand. Or that Gygax never realized people would want to know more about what the Greyhawk names were.
One might've assumed that since I had referred to product history, I might be familiar.
I mentioned the product history and Greyhawk's creation, because it's a frequent misconception that Greyhawk originated with the folio, and based on the fact that you accidentally misspoke (referring to the creation of Greyhawk, and the release of the WoG folio separately), it wasn't an unreasonable assumption.

< ... quotes and quotes and quotes ...>

Of course, he later came around and had plans to publish more details on various regions of the setting but his going to Hollywood and eventual ousting stopped GH from becoming a fully detailed setting like Forgotten Realms.

Yep. I'm familiar. Intimately familiar, in fact.
You're preaching at the choir.

 

[Parmandur]

That looks a lot more interesting to me than the Legends and Lore book they just came out with.

My problem with that book is that I...have all the art on my bookshelf already.

The 32 pages of art and lore dedicated just to Greyhawk here suggest an intentional plan, offer a barebones playable Greyhawk in the DMG, but spread about about fluff in other ways robust make it usable for DMs.