Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Zardnaar" data-source="post: 7790385" data-attributes="member: 6716779">I don't recall the Tiefling in the original. I'm a lot more open to things being NPCs. If Greyhawk is everything goes why bother playing it over FR? At least adding Tieflings makes some sense and they tied it to Iuz so they made an effort.&nbsp;Or if Nerath is everything goes along with Eberron there's not really that much point in the individual settings unless they have unique mechanics in some way. Greyhawk was one option I gave a new group. They picked Midgard, but I was thinking of adding the AD&amp;D alignment and racial restrictions back into the game. &nbsp;One player asked why and I pointed out Ehlona and Hieroneous alignment. They were actually fine with it as it's a reason in game.&nbsp;Unless you are the world's best DM for inter kingdom politics how would you make GH distinct to FR? Ban everything after 1983 as player options.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Zardnaar, post: 7790385, member: 6716779"] I don't recall the Tiefling in the original. I'm a lot more open to things being NPCs. If Greyhawk is everything goes why bother playing it over FR? At least adding Tieflings makes some sense and they tied it to Iuz so they made an effort. Or if Nerath is everything goes along with Eberron there's not really that much point in the individual settings unless they have unique mechanics in some way. Greyhawk was one option I gave a new group. They picked Midgard, but I was thinking of adding the AD&D alignment and racial restrictions back into the game. One player asked why and I pointed out Ehlona and Hieroneous alignment. They were actually fine with it as it's a reason in game. Unless you are the world's best DM for inter kingdom politics how would you make GH distinct to FR? Ban everything after 1983 as player options. [/QUOTE]

Verification