log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E How do you hope WotC treats the upcoming classic settings?

MonsterEnvy

Adventurer
thank you for making my point about why darksun & every other non-fr/gh clone would only made worse by suggesting the similarity with a thing so deeply linked to FR's lore. You literally named one plane & effectively referenced a second one that are not part of eberron's cosmology both of which require a very different spin on alignment to describe khyber. It's the sort of innocent question that forces a long "what khyber is not" tangent rather than "here's what khyber is" simple description
I am pretty sure I did not do that, you kind of made a wild leap. What I said does not matter to Alignment.
I said Khyber is like the Underdark plus it has traits of the Abyss and Hell (More the Aybss then Hell). Those planes are not in Eberron, but Khyber has traits from them. Namely the seemingly endless nature, being home to a bunch of pocket realities that tend to be awful, and being the source of most of Eberron’s fiends and some of it’s biggest baddest villains.

This describes Khyber fine.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

pming

Legend
Hiya.
I wasn't aware that WotC went to every fans house, rounded up every copy of the older material, and burned it all. Last I checked I still have shelves full of the stuff. History is still there. Adding to or updating D&D settings for new fans isn't losing our history. All the old printed stuff is still there. Most of it is still available as PDFs from the DMs Guild. We're losing nothing. We're gaining something.
Nope. Not house to house...only Forum to Forum.
;)

It's like when Drizz't was killed by Elminster because Elminster accidentally messed up the spell Drizz't wanted cast on him to change his gender.

What? That didn't happen? Well, it could have in the "updated version" of the FR. I'm sure that nobody would get upset over that... I mean, Drizz't should be able to do what he/she wants and Elminster is just a human...he can screw up spells, it's not like he's extra special simply because he's a white male. Right..? Besides, it's not like all the older stuff isn't still there. You can keep using that.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

Scribe

Hero
Whether they mention it or not, it'll still be canonically connected.

And we all have to live with that -dirty- feeling...

Or not, for those of us who don't feel it.
The entire basis of my life is denial of things I wish did not exist.

Add one more thing that isnt actually mentioned and those are the easy ones. ;)
 

MonsterEnvy

Adventurer
Hiya.

Nope. Not house to house...only Forum to Forum.
;)

It's like when Drizz't was killed by Elminster because Elminster accidentally messed up the spell Drizz't wanted cast on him to change his gender.

What? That didn't happen? Well, it could have in the "updated version" of the FR. I'm sure that nobody would get upset over that... I mean, Drizz't should be able to do what he/she wants and Elminster is just a human...he can screw up spells, it's not like he's extra special simply because he's a white male. Right..? Besides, it's not like all the older stuff isn't still there. You can keep using that.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
I would not be bothered by that, I presume Elminster and Drizzt’s friends would have gotten him rezed. Though I don’t think the two of them even know each other.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Hiya.

Nope. Not house to house...only Forum to Forum.
;)

It's like when Drizz't was killed by Elminster because Elminster accidentally messed up the spell Drizz't wanted cast on him to change his gender.

What? That didn't happen? Well, it could have in the "updated version" of the FR.
So what? Drizzle is an obnoxiously overused character anyway. Better to do something to fix the sausage party of D&D characters. If not, sure, kill him off and move on. The death of a fictional character is some game book doesn't matter. You can ignore it. You can wait until it's retconned six months later. Why bother getting mad about it? Nothing forces you to accept some new piece of information into your personal head canon.
I'm sure that nobody would get upset over that...
Who cares? "Fans" rage about everything all the time no matter what anyway. Engage with the things you enjoy and ignore the things you don't. It's not hard. You don't like the updates to an older setting WotC is putting out, ignore it. There. Done. No problem.
I mean, Drizz't should be able to do what he/she wants and Elminster is just a human...he can screw up spells...
Not according to most versions of D&D. There's basically zero chance for spell failure.
it's not like he's extra special simply because he's a white male. Right..? Besides, it's not like all the older stuff isn't still there. You can keep using that.
What the hell are you talking about? Whatever windmill you're tilting at isn't part of this conversation.
 

So far Ravenloft is the only horror-specific setting I've run (although I find horror eventually creeps into anything I run), and I've rarely had the opportunity to even play in a horror game. I've never run "weekend in hell" Ravenloft and I've always had the default for the players that they are native to one of the domains (although they can choose to be an outlander if hey wish).

But anyway, for the most part, it doesn't really matter to me that VGR rewrote a bunch of earlier Ravenloft canon. A lot of the new stuff is cool, so I combine it with what's I liked from the earlier editions. And I think that they kept the themes for the domains pretty well, even if the particulars are often different. Like, Borca and Dementlieu are still sufficiently decadent, and it's still limited to the upper class for Borca and Dementlieu is still beset by rumor, scandal, and lies. OK, Ivan isn't going to be pretending to be a Totally Normal Person until he whisks you away to his Joker-esque Funhouse of Doom anymore, but he's a different type of really creepy, and I like that. I like that Ivana is actively involved in alchemy and business instead of just pining after men now. I'm glad that rapey darklords like Dominic got replaced. Valachan is a bit weird now, what with the displacer beasts, but it was always weird and was always hunt-based.

I even like the idea that every domain is an island. It allows me a bit more freedom to move people around more (I always felt having the Mists come and snatch people away was a bit much; here, people can choose to leave the map and go elsewhere), and I have already decided that there are Mistway roads that can be taken to travel mostly safely from one domain to the next in an orderly fashion (as long as you don't leave the road, of course!), thus allowing for a modicum of trade and travel.

Honestly, the only bits I really wish they had included from before were a fleshed-out Vechor, Shadow Rift, Nidala, and the various religions. (Yes, I know that the Rift and Nidala are mentioned, but only in passing.)
But those are just the new things you're talking about. What did you like about the setting before? You said you were an old fan, but you've only referenced the things you liked that were changed. I dont understand why you were a fan in the 90s. Just the religions and couple of domains?
 



Faolyn

Hero
But those are just the new things you're talking about. What did you like about the setting before? You said you were an old fan, but you've only referenced the things you liked that were changed. I dont understand why you were a fan in the 90s. Just the religions and couple of domains?
I liked the setting as a whole. I liked how reading the Black Box inspired me with fascinating images, and how those images only grew as new supplements were written. I liked how, even with as little description they were given, each domain gave me a different feeling, and how each domain was expanded upon and made into a living, breathing place in 3x. I liked how the Van Richten's Guides and Children of the Night inspired me to create interesting monsters with interesting backgrounds and created creatures that weren't just statblocks. I liked how cool and weird and horrific the monsters were (even if many of them were also silly or pointless). I liked the concept of the Mists and Dark Powers as eldritch entities of unknown purpose and intent playing games with everyone's lives and warping the land with such evil it changed even the ways magic worked. I liked the idea of nonhumans being more myth than reality, unlike every other setting.

That help?
 



I liked the setting as a whole. I liked how reading the Black Box inspired me with fascinating images, and how those images only grew as new supplements were written. I liked how, even with as little description they were given, each domain gave me a different feeling, and how each domain was expanded upon and made into a living, breathing place in 3x. I liked how the Van Richten's Guides and Children of the Night inspired me to create interesting monsters with interesting backgrounds and created creatures that weren't just statblocks. I liked how cool and weird and horrific the monsters were (even if many of them were also silly or pointless). I liked the concept of the Mists and Dark Powers as eldritch entities of unknown purpose and intent playing games with everyone's lives and warping the land with such evil it changed even the ways magic worked. I liked the idea of nonhumans being more myth than reality, unlike every other setting.

That help?
Absolutely. I loved those things about the old setting too. I just feel too much of that was lost in the reboot. But, like everyone says, I still have my old stuff. No reason to yuck anyone else's yum.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
My question: why bother (remake Greyhawk)? What's the point?

There are always really only a couple of reasons to make any game product - 1) To give some gamers something they might like, and 2) To make some money. And surely by now you've recognized that there's been a huge influx of D&D players who have been given no reason to even look at it, so they are a market to whom it might be sold. And, that new market is... not of older sensibilities. So, remake it to sell it to people who have newer points of view. Let them have fun with it, and earn some money from them. It is that simple.

But, beyond that...

Why bother doing yet another staging of Shakespeare? Surely, it has been done enough, and filmed, so that nobody should ever have to perform the play ever again! Or another Sherlock Holmes retelling. Or another Cyrano de Bergerac - which is going to be coming out on New Years' Eve in the US, as a musical, starring Peter Dinklage, by the way...

Heaven forefend if maybe Greyhawk is inspiring to some of the folks at WotC! It isn't as if the only people in the world who like it are the ones who want to encase it in Lucite like a museum piece!

If you want a classic setting adjusted to the modern era, why not the Realms?

That's already happening. It is the default for D&D at this time, and D&D as a whole is being adjusted, so the Realms goes along for the ride.

Or why not just create a new setting?

Because, like it or not, fully new things are higher risk.

Greyhawk is different than most classic settings in that it didn't really evolve beyond its original form.

You say that as if it were a positive thing. The only constant in human existence is change, you know.

But I don't see any point in re-envisioning it towards modern sensibilities. It seems unnecessary and creatively lazy.

Ah, the old "lazy" chestnut. When in doubt, be insulting!
 

MGibster

Legend
Absolutely. I loved those things about the old setting too. I just feel too much of that was lost in the reboot. But, like everyone says, I still have my old stuff. No reason to yuck anyone else's yum.
Ravenloft was one of my favorite 2nd edition settings. But it's been a little over 30 years since it came out and there's a lot I've forgotten in the intervening years. In threads about the latest Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, people were mentioning domains I had entirely forgotten about.
Why bother doing yet another staging of Shakespeare? Surely, it has been done enough, and filmed, so that nobody should ever have to perform the play ever again! Or another Sherlock Holmes retelling. Or another Cyrano de Bergerac - which is going to be coming out on New Years' Eve in the US, as a musical, starring Peter Dinklage, by the way...
I'm not generally opposed to reinterpretations of past works. The Arthurian stories have certainly been updated and reinterpreted multiple times over the centuries. And I'm sure some people are still upset they unnecessarily inserted that French knight into what was a perfectly good Welsh tale. But there are some reinterpretations that make such big changes to the source material that I sometimes wonder why they bothered which gives us utter tripe like First Knight (1995) and King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017). Given that WotC seems to be hitting it out of the park as of late, I don't see why Greyhawk isn't a viable candidate for being updated.
 

pming

Legend
Hiya!

Wow, we're really butting heads huh? Ahh well... variety is the spice of life and all that, right! :)

So what? Drizzle is an obnoxiously overused character anyway. Better to do something to fix the sausage party of D&D characters. If not, sure, kill him off and move on. The death of a fictional character is some game book doesn't matter. You can ignore it. You can wait until it's retconned six months later. Why bother getting mad about it? Nothing forces you to accept some new piece of information into your personal head canon.
Ditto, but reverse. Nothing is stopping you from running a Greyhawk game using the old books. You can ignore the stuff you don't like. You can retcon whatever you want to make yourself feel more comfortable. Why bother getting mad about it? Nothing forces you to accept some old piece of writing for your own campaign.

Who cares? "Fans" rage about everything all the time no matter what anyway. Engage with the things you enjoy and ignore the things you don't. It's not hard. You don't like the updates to an older setting WotC is putting out, ignore it. There. Done. No problem.
Again, ditto, but reverse.

Also...why even bother trying to "update" Greyhawk in the first place then? Why not just convert it as is and then start pumping out new stuff for it. If adventures start coming out for it that start to change, say, the whole "white supremacist psycho-monk-assassins" that is the Scarlet Brotherhood (perhaps some sort of secret infiltration by good guys, using it's strict Lawfulness against it to enact changes towards Good...or at least away from Evil), this would be fine. If done well, of course. There is nothing wrong with that. But going to the original source material, saying "This might offend someone" and then re-writing the entirety of the Scarlet Brotherhood to be something completely different...that's not cool.
(That said... I still don't want them to even look in Greyhawks general direction, let alone touch it! ;) ).

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 


Mercurius

Legend
Ah, the old "lazy" chestnut. When in doubt, be insulting!
Who am I insulting, Umbran? No actual specific person, and not even WotC as a whole for a hypothetical that might never happen. If I am insulting anything, it is the media culture of endless remakes (and "insulting" is not the right word, really; critiquing or maybe criticizing).

And yes, I realize that everything changes. But I'm not sure that really applies to this. We're not talking about musical tastes or cultural views or a person's preference in ice cream flavors, or even Buddhist impermanence. We're talking about a fantasy world that, by its nature, is outside of time, that is an archetype that can, yes, manifest in different times and places, and embody different flavors. Certainly, many versions of Greyhawk can and do exist - as many as DMs who have run it. I'm not against people making it their own, or even WotC remaking it, or any other setting.

But just because they can, doesn't mean they should. A director could remake Casablanca, but should they? Is there anything wrong with preserving Casablanca as a striking representation of film and culture of the early 1940s? I am not suggesting that Greyhawk is the D&D equivalent of Casablanca, by the way. But I am suggesting that, just as--in my opinion--Casablanca is left alone, as a singular film from 1942, so too might it be for the best if Greyhawk is preserved as a world that represents the look and feel of D&D in 1980 (plus or minus a few years).

I have often argued in past editions--in 4E era, for instance--that I'd prefer WotC to create new settings than rehash old ones. That was mainly because of personal preferences: I love setting books and, if given the choice, I generally prefer something new to an updated version of something old.

Thankfully, with 5E, we don't have to choose. They're going a bit "setting happy," which pleases me greatly. And I like their mixture of classic, Magic, and new. I don't like everything they churn out, nor do I feel entitled to. But with anywhere from 3-6 settings planned for the next two years, there's a lot to choose from (by my count: 3 classics, 0-1 Magic, 0-2 new).

And don't get me wrong, I'm not a Greyhawk fanatic or purist. Don't tell anyone around here, but I almost prefer the Realms (at least the Greenwood and FRCS version). In other words, I'm not speaking from a "from my cold, dead hands" perspective. I'm not saying, "Leave Greyhawk alone or I'll summon Emirikol to zap you!" I'm just considering creative direction, possibilities, and even a touch of ethics.

I've also spoken several times about how I think they should do Greyhawk, a deluxe box set that I first suggested a few years back. I'm not opposed to it at all. But I do think that if they do it, they should hew closer to the original vision than other settings, because of what Greyhawk represents: the feel of early D&D in its first decade. "Gygaxia." I would hate to see WotC Mercerize it or colonize it with more recent tropes that would be incongruous with the original vibe. I mean, maybe the Suel Imperium were dragonborn, and the valley elves are morphed into aevendrow...I mean, if they go that route, fine, that's their prerogative. It would be a shame, though. IMO.
 

MonsterEnvy

Adventurer
Also...why even bother trying to "update" Greyhawk in the first place then? Why not just convert it as is and then start pumping out new stuff for it. If adventures start coming out for it that start to change, say, the whole "white supremacist psycho-monk-assassins" that is the Scarlet Brotherhood (perhaps some sort of secret infiltration by good guys, using it's strict Lawfulness against it to enact changes towards Good...or at least away from Evil), this would be fine. If done well, of course. There is nothing wrong with that. But going to the original source material, saying "This might offend someone" and then re-writing the entirety of the Scarlet Brotherhood to be something completely different...that's not cool.
(That said... I still don't want them to even look in Greyhawks general direction, let alone touch it! ;) ).
I once again doubt the Brotherhood would be changed. They are villains and punching Nazi's has always been fine.
 

pming

Legend
Hiya!
I once again doubt the Brotherhood would be changed. They are villains and punching Nazi's has always been fine.
You missed the point. It was that something that has been a (rather big) part of Greyhawk would have gotten changed...not what it was.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

Heaven forefend if maybe Greyhawk is inspiring to some of the folks at WotC! It isn't as if the only people in the world who like it are the ones who want to encase it in Lucite like a museum piece!
The thing about Greyhawk is that the only thing that's really interesting today is that it's a perfect representation of early 80's DnD'isms. So how do you update something like that to the modern edition? If you try to keep things as unchanged as possible you end up with a setting that doesn't fit the game it's made for, but if you try to adapt everything to the latest edition then you get a setting that's mostly bland and boring.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top