D&D General Greyhawk setting material

[David Howery]

The Dragon Annual #1 map had pastishe versions of China, Japan and India in the midsection of the continent with a fantasy Egypt in the south west.

I was... really not impressed by that map. Too much stuff scattered all over the place. I drew up plenty of my own maps of Oerik in particular and Oerth in general, having fewer landmasses than EGGs map.... more like our world. I remember when we first got a look at the map for Oriental Adventurers, I quickly reversed it and put it on the west side of Oerik….

 

[Azzy]

Note the key part 4E players. There wasn't enough of them to keep it going.

blinks Are you implying that a supplement for one rules system wasn't popular with players of a different system? I'm sure that the 3e FRCS wasn't popular with players of Call of Cthulhu or Villains and Vigilates, either.

 

[Azzy]

The Dragon Annual #1 map had pastishe versions of China, Japan and India in the midsection of the continent with a fantasy Egypt in the south west.

That map was so awful both as an area map and as adding pastiches willy-nilly without though, care, or reason.

 

[The Glen]

Considering how gonzo Mystara is, limiting a race from the PHB would be a bad joke. Seriously with nagpa, aranea, diabolus, hsiao, phanatons, and lupins you want to die on the hill of dragonborn?.

Considering it doesn't have drow, duergar, sverfneblin, derro, half orcs, half elves, kenku, aarakrokra, tabaxi, tieflings, aasimar, illithid, or gods yes I'll defend that hill gladly. Adding every race to a setting turns it into the watered-down pablum that the forgotten realms has devolved into. It's not that it has all those races, it's also that it doesn't have the races common in other settings, making Mystara unique. Mystara was created separately from Greyhawk and the realms so its core races are different. It has its own monsters, its own races, and it's own identity.

 

[Zardnaar]

blinks Are you implying that a supplement for one rules system wasn't popular with players of a different system? I'm sure that the 3e FRCS wasn't popular with players of Call of Cthulhu or Villains and Vigilates, either.

No I'm saying one system crashed and burned and the game designers know it.

This is why we have 5E. I'm not expecting wonders from 5E Darksun but I bet it will be better recieved.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Mystara was created separately from Greyhawk and the realms so its core races are different. It has its own monsters, its own races, and it's own identity.

The good thing about Mystara is that you can say "No, but". No drow, but shadow elves. No tieflings, but diaboli. No dragonborn, but Mystaran drakes.

 

[grodog]

Heck, y'know what? Let's take it a step further. I mean, we've got @grodog in this thread. I hope he's still reading. I wonder how he would feel if WotC turned to him and all the folks at Canonfire who've spend the last twenty years keeping the setting alive, and basically said, nope. All that work you did? Worthless. We're going to ignore all of that, chuck it in the bin, and reset the setting to 1983. Anna Meyer maps? Pshaw. Totally worthless. Hundreds of hours writing things like the Oerth Journals? Not worth the electronic ink.

LOL, well, what WotC does really doesn't affect my games or my interest in Greyhawk in general, so from that POV I'm fine: I learned that lesson long ago with WG7's version of Castle Greyhawk I did pick up the Ghosts of Saltmarsh book a couple of weeks ago from my FLGS, and while I haven't read it in depht yet, it does look like it adds some worthwhile info/details to that region of Greyhawk.

Nope, we're going to reset the setting because there is a segment of the fandom who cannot bear to see any new ideas in the setting and have declared that anything after 1983 is garbage and should be excised from the game.

Despite my love for the work done by Gary and Rob, I'm not in that camp: I like good, new, worthwhile material that treats the setting's history with respect, and builds out Greyhawk with new NPCs, foes, plots, magics, etc.---I need another rehash of the Giants/Drow or Slavers or Tomb of Horrors modules about as much as I need another version of the Death Star in the next Star Wars movie.

In my Greyhawk campaigns, I've used materials from all across its publishing eras---from Carl Sargent's From the Ashes to @Rob Kuntz 's Maze of Zayene and Bottle City adventures; I've lifted ideas and modules from the FR, the Known World, and many non-TSR publications as gaming needs and player interest dictate. If WotC can produce new content that's cool and grounded in the setting, I'm all for it; if they produce crap like much of the RPGA-rebranded dross from the 2e era, then I'll ignore it. (And I'd certainly love to see an expanded Maure Castle filled out in full, for example!).

Does that answer your Q @Hussar ?

Allan.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Dragonborn are already in Greyhawk, aren't they? They predate to 3rd Edition, where they were introduced in a generic supplement. In 3E, Generic = Greyhawk. Therefore, the precedent was set.

Interestingly that might imply that their original 3E backstory (transformed humans/demihumans) is their official backstory. (That's what I use in my own campaign, actually. )

 

[grodog]

Another general comment/response about what is/isn't definingly "Greyhawk" in games:

Since I tend to think of the various campaigns I've run in the Greyhawk setting as parallel timelines or alternate Prime Material plane Oerths---each distinct from one another, but united in their essential Greyhawkness---consequently, I don't worry too much about what "Greyhawk" is or means in the big picture, with respect to that particular campaign. I like variety in my campaigns, since there's so much breadth and depth within Greyhawk to play with, and certianly some of that vibrancy comes from new authors/new ideas entering the setting, as well as my own preferences, and what the players bring to the table too.

When I get around to running my "Land of Black Ice Blight" campaign, that'll be one where Black Ice glaciation has spread south, deep into the central lands of The Flanaess. I might run that set in 576 CY, or 176 CY, or -666 CY. No idea. But that campaign won't necessarily have any bearing on how I want to run Greyhawk the next time around (or, it may, depending on who's playing and how the campaign turned out).

So for me, new/cool Greyhawk material has to pass the sniff test or I ignore it (I ignore lots of other cool, neat Greyhawk material in the course of any given campaign if it doesn't end up fitting in either, of course). If I had a game that required tieflings (an Unseeling Court game inspired by @Sepulchrave II 's Afqithan demi-plane, for example), they would be a part of that campaign, same for dragonborn or Qualinesti elves or whatever. That doesn't mean that they're on or off the table in the next campaign though. I take each campaign on its own merits, I suppose.

Anyway, I'm off to bed! =)

Allan.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

The thing is, in 5E, it seems the intention is to reskin PHB races to fit the worlds, not ban them entirely.

A 5E Dragonlance would have reskinned halflings (kender) and dragonborn (draconians), half-orcs (some variety of ogres), aasimar (irda, most likely). Mystara, tabaxi (rakasta), Dark Sun, dragonborn (dray), goliath (half-giant) etc.