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

[GothmogIV]

From another thread:

Emphasis mine

So, I was very, very wrong. I was sure they would have created something new with appeal directed at GenZ players. Not the first time I have been wrong. Oh well.

But, I am curious why. Why Greyhawk? I mean, sure, 50th anniversary, but is that all? What does Greyhawk have about it that makes it a good fit for the vast majority of current and potential future players who have never known GH?

For the record, I am a GenXer who grew up with BECMI and 2E. I never played in Greyhawk, but I was aware of it because of Dragon Magazine mostly. Until Eberron appeared with 3.5, the only setting I used with an depth or regularity was Krynn/Dragonlance. We played in "The Known World" but never got more in depth than what was in the Expert book.

Anyway: why do YOU think they decided on Greyhawk for the example DMG setting?

Speculation: Greyhawk will be 'new' to the GenZ players, or at least to most of them. It is far less developed than other settings, and can be used to provide a loose outline for people to mess around with. Also, Greyhawk is attractive to old-heads like me. I had no intention of buying any of the 5.5 stuff until I heard this.

 

[Reynard]

Speculation: Greyhawk will be 'new' to the GenZ players, or at least to most of them. It is far less developed than other settings, and can be used to provide a loose outline for people to mess around with. Also, Greyhawk is attractive to old-heads like me. I had no intention of buying any of the 5.5 stuff until I heard this.

I find it fascinating that people talk about how much they love Greyhawk and its lore, and then also tout its undeveloped nature. It makes me think people love Greyhawk for what they brought to it (awesome) but that seems like it will lead to disappointment in whatever WotC does with it in the DMG.

 

[Minigiant]

Why?

Because is pushing Greyhawk NOCs as major IP.

exit business mode

 

[TiQuinn]

I find it fascinating that people talk about how much they love Greyhawk and its lore, and then also tout its undeveloped nature. It makes me think people love Greyhawk for what they brought to it (awesome) but that seems like it will lead to disappointment in whatever WotC does with it in the DMG.

The “lore” of Greyhawk is really about the “lore” of Gary Gygax’s original campaign. There is very little published, official lore. But there are a lot of people who spent years trying to figure out what pieces of the DMG and the PHB were part of Gygax’s campaign versus Arneson’s, and what Castle Greyhawk’s levels were really like, particularly while he was alive and answering questions on forums like Dragonsfoot.

 

[Yaarel]

Heh, actually Greyhawk is more developed than any other setting. Its just, most of it is now normal D&D. So the stuff thats left that normal D&D fails to mention isnt much.

The stuff of Greyhawk that I enjoy is:

• Grey Wizard culture of Elves
• Grugach Strength athletics culture of Elves

Not as "subraces", but as 5e cultural backgrounds that any species can participate in. 4e Eladrin are Grey wizardly civilization. But the 5e Eladrin are something else, more seasonal wilderness naturalists. I want majestic Elven cities of magic across the Feywild. Fey urbanites whose spaces are woven out of magic and accomplish tasks magically.

• Valley of the Mage
• Aliens and robots and lasers
• Psionic angels

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I find it fascinating that people talk about how much they love Greyhawk and its lore, and then also tout its undeveloped nature. It makes me think people love Greyhawk for what they brought to it (awesome) but that seems like it will lead to disappointment in whatever WotC does with it in the DMG.

I don’t know. We had a 5e campaign through 10th level in which we used Greyhawk maps and fought the minions of Iuz. Iuz and his worship figured prominently.

There was some lore about Wee Jas as well. I genuinely prefer the Greyhawk pantheon to FR by several times.

Conversely how much was I filling in to make it seem more medieval? Of picture the DM showed us how much did that shape my imagination?

Could the names have just been changed and it would have been the same? I am sure it would have been fine…but I do like Greyhawk personally

 

[AstroCat]

What I personally think should be the case: Hey we've ignored a very large portion of our customer base, those that have supported the game through thick and thin for decades. Maybe we should provide a tiny amount of content they might enjoy to see if we can win back or retain what remains of this customer base. Plus, it might even be enjoyed by our newer customers, and again it's just a tiny portion of all the new content.

The more realistic but cynical take, and most likely the real case: Hey, what is left of the original d&d world we can update in a way that will finally get rid of and alienate almost all of the remaining customer base that comes before 2014/2018 or so. I know, what about that super problematic setting? Dark Sun? No, the other one... ah Greyhawk. Yeah let's front cover warrior the crap out of it! That will be awesome! Yeah... mach 10 full ahead!

So, yeah I'm going with take two. A deliberate destruction of everything people enjoyed, related to and connected with in Greyhawk will be purposely and spitefully destroyed, oh I'm sorry "updated". You know, just to show "them/others" from "before" they are truly not welcome any more, at least in any "official" capacity. Love to be wrong, but I don't see why I would be.

 

[eyeheartawk]

And I don't remember if it was in the folio or just in the boxed set, but the charts of mass migration of various ethnic groups, although pretty cool as an idea, are definitely not making it in, either.

This is how it started. It ended up with tables of the population density of future Cleveland in Cyborg Commando.

 

[Weiley31]

Ain't nothin' but a heartache!

 

[Burnside]

From another thread:

Emphasis mine

So, I was very, very wrong. I was sure they would have created something new with appeal directed at GenZ players. Not the first time I have been wrong. Oh well.

But, I am curious why. Why Greyhawk? I mean, sure, 50th anniversary, but is that all? What does Greyhawk have about it that makes it a good fit for the vast majority of current and potential future players who have never known GH?

For the record, I am a GenXer who grew up with BECMI and 2E. I never played in Greyhawk, but I was aware of it because of Dragon Magazine mostly. Until Eberron appeared with 3.5, the only setting I used with an depth or regularity was Krynn/Dragonlance. We played in "The Known World" but never got more in depth than what was in the Expert book.

Anyway: why do YOU think they decided on Greyhawk for the example DMG setting?

It’s included because it might make some people buy the book. The setting hasn’t been presented fully in more than a decade, and people are nostalgic for it. Nobody is going to NOT buy the new DMG because Greyhawk is in there, and it’ll get some extra curiousity/nostalgia buys.

The second reason is that apart from Forgotten Realms, it’s the kitchen sink/meat and potatoes/bog standard fantasy D&D setting where pretty much anything in the PHB and Monster Manual fits.

The third reason is, assuming you want a fairly generic fantasy setting, then, having been ignored for years, Greyhawk now feels more manageable and less fraught and convoluted that FR, with fewer continuity issues. This is getting one chapter in the DMG. One chapter is probably inadequate to present the Greyhawk setting, but it would be insanely inadequate to try to present FR in one chapter.

Good news is, this probably means that Greyhawk will finally become fair game for DMsGuild.