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

[tsadkiel]

The difference between Faerun and Oerth is small. At heart, they are both kitchen sink settings that don't deviate from the D&D expectations. The difference is scope and small amounts of lore and tone.

I think if I wanted to play up the differences, I would point out that they're both kitchen sink settings but the Greyhawk sink has some older things in it - Westerns, the Barsoom books, and quite a bit of influence from historical wargaming, thus the extensive heraldry for all of the nation states.

It's not as easy as dark and gritty swords and sorcery, though, because both settings have plenty of sword and sorcery influences, and Greyhawk as written isn't really notably darker. (Except for "From the Ashes," but speaking as someone who was running a Greyhawk game at the time, that was a notable shift in tone.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

Okay get into my mind space.

In the Greyhawk + Thread, the Greyhawk constantly state how Greyhawk is different from the base of 5e.

So if Greyhawk is so different from modern 5e, why should we use it to teach modern 5e?

Someone explain that logic to me

Because they associate Greyhawk with old school play and assume having Greyhawk show up in the DMG implies teaching people to play D&D in an old school manner. Just like how saying feats were optional did.

 

[Remathilis]

to be fair, 2e took those elements of Greyhawk and spun them into a personality for the setting back in the 90s.

To a degree. TSR did try to play up the "return to the dungeon" vibe with GH at the end of 2e. And they had a bit of that whole vibe in early 3e as well. It was a reaction to the heavy metaplots and railroads 2e had become notorious for and wanted to get a little of the classic edge back (including a Dragon Magazine ad where a Greyhawk wizard asks "what the hell is a baatezu?").

However, I don't think that is as much an issue. Most of D&D now has that edge, it's practically swimming in that nostalgia.

 

[Minigiant]

Most of those people are talking about why they loved it in 2e. Of course they are going to focus on how it was so different, They haven't seen 5e Greyhawk yet.

And, again, the chapter in question IS NOT teaching modern 5e. It is teaching WORLD BUILDING. That is a completely different subject.

I don't know how you teach would building in D&D without references to the base assumptions and base elements of the current game.

You can understand how I can be skeptical of a publisher who didn't talk new DMs through other bigger systems like encounter building, monster design, and spell design carefully would be careful with a harder topic and subject.

Greyhawk fans make Greyhawk look like more work than WOTC is typically willing to put out in teaching these days.

 

[Remathilis]

I think if I wanted to play up the differences, I would point out that they're both kitchen sink settings but the Greyhawk sink has some older things in it - Westerns, the Barsoom books, and quite a bit of influence from historical wargaming, thus the extensive heraldry for all of the nation states.

It's not as easy as dark and gritty swords and sorcery, though, because both settings have plenty of sword and sorcery influences, and Greyhawk as written isn't really notably darker. (Except for "From the Ashes," but speaking as someone who was running a Greyhawk game at the time, that was a notable shift in tone.)

You certainly can play that aspect up, just like Eberron can play up the pulp or the noir aspects, but its not necessary to do so to enjoy the setting.

 

[Gradine]

 

[Faolyn]

The path from regular folk to Immortal is one of the best parts of the Known World. Would love to see this!

I have to say I'm tempted to figure out how to do it for Level Up, but it would take a lot of work and playtesting.

 

[Faolyn]

I need someone to explain to me what updates Greyhawk needs. Cause from reading it, it does not really require much.

Probably only statblocks and a sensitivity reader, from what I know about it. And official statements of where the non-standard PC species arise from so that people newer to the setting can enjoy their tieflings and whatnot and the old fans can accept it.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

I have to say I'm tempted to figure out how to do it for Level Up, but it would take a lot of work and playtesting.

god, i'd love an epic/immortal level handbook for level up. that'd go CRAZY.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't know how you teach would building in D&D without references to the base assumptions and base elements of the current game.

I don't understand how you think the setting that gave us Acerak, Vecna, Kas, Fraz-Urblu, Demogorgon and tons of others can't handle "be the hero, defeat the evil" which is the only base assumption and base element needed for a DnD game.

Half of the things you seem to think are baseline assumptions existed in Greyhawk 20 years ago when 3.5 was published with Greyhawk as the official setting of the game. MAgic coming out of people's eyeballs? The term "Magic Mart" started with 3.5 and the magic item creation rules that allowed everyone and their second cousin to make magical items. Psionics? Existed in Greyhawk before. Powerful magic-users? Existed before, you can claim "only at high levels" but when you are building the world you usually focus on the high level NPCs because the low-level NPCs aren't changing the world.

You just keep taking 2e and slamming it against 5e and then declaring the setting cannot possibly be used in this manner, despite just about every other setting from 2e being made in 5e at this point. And the two that are missing are the two FARTHEST from typical DnD, unlike Greyhawk.

You can understand how I can be skeptical of a publisher who didn't talk new DMs through other bigger systems like encounter building, monster design, and spell design carefully would be careful with a harder topic and subject.

You mean the mistakes they acknowledged and declared that they will be addressing in the new DMG? I mean, feel free to be skeptical that they are not going to do a good job, but whether or not they do a good job is entirely separate from whether or not it is POSSIBLE to do.

Greyhawk fans make Greyhawk look like more work than WOTC is typically willing to put out in teaching these days.

Woah, fans of 2e settings that typically don't like 5e make it seem like 5e won't be as good as 2e. Knock me over with a feather, that is almost as good as actual proof. OR it is completely expected, obvious, and doesn't mean much of anything.