Is Greyhawk Relevant?

[Orius]

I thought my holding up the module Castle Greyhawk as the apotheosis of the setting would have tipped my hand. Ah, well. Carry on. Apologies to anyone offended.

Bah. Gnomes and their pranks....

 

[Doug McCrae]

I thought my holding up the module Castle Greyhawk as the apotheosis of the setting would have tipped my hand. Ah, well. Carry on. Apologies to anyone offended.

I thought you made several good points. Specifically,

1) Having a Nevada gun store's worth of tech makes things more awesome, not less. Pretty reminiscent of D&D's approach to magic items throughout its history.
2) Experienced gamers are less likely to try anything because they know what works and what doesn't. They lack the, often very attractive, enthusiasm of the newbie.

 

[Coldwyn]

I think Greyhawk lost relevance not because what it had but because what it was lacking compared to later setting.
Kitchen sink effect aside, I think it´s safe to assume that most later settings have focus, either on theme (World of Darkness, Eberron), meta-plot (3.x Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance) or support function (Golarion).
GH is a good DIY setting: Pick a place, pick up some names and backgrounds, work with it. I loved the Living Greyhawk Gazeteer for that.
But right now, PoL provides the same DIY-function but with broader strokes.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Saying Greyhawk is "not relevant" is about like trying to say that the Lord of the Rings Middle Earth isn't relevant in today's world of Harry Potter, Eragon and the like.

It simply isn't true.

that Greyhawk movie totally rocked and really brought the setting to the forefront of gaming again.

Oh wait...

 

[Dragonhelm]

I wanted to go on record as to say I was completely wrong about the 2011 setting.

That's okay. Nentir Vale is getting some love, and we're seeing Ravenloft again! I wasn't certain RL would get any love with the Domains of Dread. So glad to be wrong there.

I'd still like to see Greyhawk brought back someday, though.

 

[Jor-El]

Kind of "frightens" me that the Ravenloft game will allow you to play a Vampire, Werewolf, and Ghost....

Twilight.

That's all I'm sayin'.

 

[MerricB]

Kind of "frightens" me that the Ravenloft game will allow you to play a Vampire, Werewolf, and Ghost....

Twilight.

That's all I'm sayin'.

Sounds a lot more like Being Human to me.

Cheers!

 

[White Tornado]

Kind of "frightens" me that the Ravenloft game will allow you to play a Vampire, Werewolf, and Ghost....

Twilight.

That's all I'm sayin'.

Well, you don't have to play a vampire, and DM's don't have to allow it. I think it's a smart move in a commercial sense - lots of people will want to play a vampire. Personally I think a horror setting wouldn't be complete without these options.

It doesn't just relate to Twilight, by the way. A friend of mine made a AD&D "half-vampire" (homebrewed race) based on Spike, from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, six years ago.

 

[Umbran]

Sounds a lot more like Being Human to me.

Or just a WoD game.

 

[Voadam]

I think Greyhawk lost relevance not because what it had but because what it was lacking compared to later setting.
Kitchen sink effect aside, I think it´s safe to assume that most later settings have focus, either on theme (World of Darkness, Eberron), meta-plot (3.x Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance) or support function (Golarion).
GH is a good DIY setting: Pick a place, pick up some names and backgrounds, work with it. I loved the Living Greyhawk Gazeteer for that.
But right now, PoL provides the same DIY-function but with broader strokes.

What would you say is the meta-plot focus of FR? Is it significantly different from say the GH metaplot of the greyhawk wars introduced in 2e?

With the 3e FRCS I felt it was similar to the LGG in providing a short entry on a ton of countries and gods so you could pick a place and go run with it.