mxmarkargent
most frequently graded n for "needs improvement"
EricNoah said:
It's a term of respect, not an insult. "Grognard" is not the same as just plain "nard".
What's the deal with Greyhawk...
- Thread starter mxmarkargent
- Start date
It's a term of respect, not an insult. "Grognard" is not the same as just plain "nard".
ColonelHardisson
What? Me Worry?
Just as a side note, which may or may not be interesting, is that Ars Magica uses a shortened version of "grognard" - "grog" ("grogs" for the plural) - to refer to the mercenaries/soldiers/hirelings that work for the wizards. Basically, they're the hired muscle (and equivalent of Star Trek's red shirts) for the covenant (the wizard's "guild" that the PCs belong to in the game).
Endur
First Post
In Defense of Living Greyhawk
In defense of Living Greyhawk, I would point out that the RPGA was under the impression that Greyhawk is now their campaign world.
And that it will continue to change and grow based on the actions of their characters.
For instance, the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (printed by WOTC in 2000) contains entries that are current for CY 590. In the Living Greyhawk campaign, there has been three years of play since the LGG was assembled (current date is CY593 or 594).
There has been various progress and changes to the countries of Greyhawk. To take Geoff as an example, the liberation is progressing, Preston has been liberated, the Giants have been driven out of the Dimwood and the Oytwood, and the liberation of Gorna will probably occur this year.
Tom
In defense of Living Greyhawk, I would point out that the RPGA was under the impression that Greyhawk is now their campaign world.
And that it will continue to change and grow based on the actions of their characters.
For instance, the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (printed by WOTC in 2000) contains entries that are current for CY 590. In the Living Greyhawk campaign, there has been three years of play since the LGG was assembled (current date is CY593 or 594).
There has been various progress and changes to the countries of Greyhawk. To take Geoff as an example, the liberation is progressing, Preston has been liberated, the Giants have been driven out of the Dimwood and the Oytwood, and the liberation of Gorna will probably occur this year.
Tom
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
No one is saying that the RPGA is doing a bad job with LG, it's just that, from my point of view at least, its sort of...inaccessible, and a bit above and beyond the amount of work some gamers might want to do.
For example, having to join the RPGA, fit in to where your characters are based on your real-world region, and regulate your adventures with your local coordinator, all so you can get new Greyhawk materials to game with and get updates to the world, does seem like a bit much. Some Greyhawk gamers would probably just like there to be periodic public updates of whats going on (LGJ is not enough) and new adventures or sourcebooks released, to say nothing of that policy of "nothing major can happen in the world" should probably be revoked.
That's my opinion on the matter anyway.
For example, having to join the RPGA, fit in to where your characters are based on your real-world region, and regulate your adventures with your local coordinator, all so you can get new Greyhawk materials to game with and get updates to the world, does seem like a bit much. Some Greyhawk gamers would probably just like there to be periodic public updates of whats going on (LGJ is not enough) and new adventures or sourcebooks released, to say nothing of that policy of "nothing major can happen in the world" should probably be revoked.
That's my opinion on the matter anyway.
Quasqueton
First Post
Isn't it ironic that some people complain that WoG is not officially advanced or expanded upon, while others complain that everytime WoG *has* been official advanced or expanded upon it went in the wrong directions? ("Wrong" meaning what the fans didn't want.)
And I've just never understood why DMs/Players needed 'official' updates, advancement, or expansions on WoG. Get the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer for complete info on the current state-of-affairs in WoG, and build your own campaign timeline advancement and territorial details. That's what Gygax and early TSR expected when they produced the earliest WoG campaign material in 1980. Why was it good then, but not sufficient now?
Quasqueton
And I've just never understood why DMs/Players needed 'official' updates, advancement, or expansions on WoG. Get the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer for complete info on the current state-of-affairs in WoG, and build your own campaign timeline advancement and territorial details. That's what Gygax and early TSR expected when they produced the earliest WoG campaign material in 1980. Why was it good then, but not sufficient now?
Quasqueton
EricNoah
Adventurer
Quasqueton, you're really hitting right at the heart of the matter as it pertains to all RPG materials and in particular setting materials. Why do we perceive the need for updates to settings? Why do we think of "old" settings and "new" settings, beyond their potential availability in a shop (that is, of course, a big issue but with WotC's ESD products you really can have just about anything from TSR's backlist)?
I have a theory (and not much to back it up) -- I think people expect (rationally or not, maybe even subconsciously) setting materials to "advance" at about the same pace that their gaming campaigns advance. Perhaps at a rate somewhere around 6 months to a year for every two "real" years. I think if updates are produced at too slow a rate, the setting is perceived as stagnant or uninteresting. And if they advance things too quickly, players may get the feeling of being railroaded toward some metaplot.
I dunno, anyone think I'm getting close?
I have a theory (and not much to back it up) -- I think people expect (rationally or not, maybe even subconsciously) setting materials to "advance" at about the same pace that their gaming campaigns advance. Perhaps at a rate somewhere around 6 months to a year for every two "real" years. I think if updates are produced at too slow a rate, the setting is perceived as stagnant or uninteresting. And if they advance things too quickly, players may get the feeling of being railroaded toward some metaplot.
I dunno, anyone think I'm getting close?
WizarDru
Adventurer
EricNoah said:
I'm off two minds on the issue. It was my understanding that Gygax has stated that he always envisioned Greyhawk as essentially a somewhat generic, intended-to-be-personalized campaign. That is to say, details were always left fairly sketchy on purpose so that individual DMs could do what they choose with the material. For example, nine gods were imprisoned beneath Castle Greyhawk. Which nine? Why were they imprisoned? Are they still there? And so forth. My Greyhawk, where an ancient council of dragons has secretly held sway over the political fortunes of the Flanaess (and now wages open war upon itself) is certainly not similar to someone else's Greyhawk, let alone Gary's original campaign. The Forgotten Realms was envisioned as the antithesis to this approach, providing vast amounts of detail for those who wanted it. How many shoe shops are in Corymyr? Why are there six standing stones in IceWind Dale, and why do the Red Wizards of Thay secretly covet them? And so forth.
On the other hand, new material is enjoyable. Some Greyhawk fans see the golden treatment that the Realms receives, and desire some of that for their setting of choice. Wouldn't a separate GHCS be nice as a sister book to the FRCS and Kalamar books? The LGG is a good book...but the material deserves more treatment. A lot of Greyhawk material still needs collation and updating for 3E (or 3.5E, now). A great deal of information has never been approached, that would be appreciated. Some folks want a 'The Shield Lands', approached the same way that "The Silver Marches' was, for example. While WoG fans may not desire the same level of granularity as FR fans (though the two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive), they do prefer more detail than currently exists. A desire for details on the Death Knights under 3E, for example, made their appearance in the LGJ very appreciated.
As for the direction issue, I don't much care, myself, but some do. Some didn't like the direction that Sargent took Greyhawk in, essentially toppling empires and making large, hard-to-ignore changes in the official material. It's one thing to say that Xavener is overking of The Great Kingdom...it's another to say that the Great Kingdom no longer exists, and is now four separate splinter-states with differing political structures. Mind you, much of this is just the march of time, and I don't much care. To some, it's a serious issue, though. They want the setting to recieve attention and development, but desire a certain static nature to the newer material.
To each his own.
As to term Grognard...it can be an insult, compliment, or merely a point of reference, depending on the speaker, IMHO. It's contextual enough that you need to consider the source and destination, per se.
Last edited:
Mercule
Adventurer
The original version had a distinct feel to it (I've heard it called "militant neutrality", but I'm not sure I agree completely). Each generation that followed has changed that feel somewhat. Personally, I think that the LG iteration is closer to the original feel than the "From the Ashes" was.
My main gripe with the way Greyhawk is relegated to the Forgotten Realms' "poor cousin". Sure, GH is the "default" setting, but there is an implication that GH is a bland, vanilla setting while FR is deep and interesting. Along with uneven treatment of GH as the "default" (I had a rather hard time trying to integrate the original adventure path modules into GH and Dungeon has intentionally decided that the second adventure path won't have any mention of GH) the current treatment of GH is almost insulting to long-time fans.
Since I mentioned the Realms, I might as well cover the hostility toward them, too (from my perspective, at least). During the 80s, when TSR was putting out a campaign setting every other week, I picked up the basic set of each, just to get ideas. FR was the only one that didn't really have anything interesting in it. I figured that FR would die a quick and painless death as it was probably the most illogicial, unattractive, and non-sensical setting I'd ever seen. Obviously, I was wrong, but my couple of attempts at playing in the setting did nothing if not convince me even more that the setting was lacking in value.
Well, FR happenned to come out about the time that TSR management really started to go down the tubes. To make a long story short (or not), for all appearances, TSR seemed to be doing their best to erase Gygax's world (Greyhawk) out of pure spite and push a different (obviously inferior, IMHO) setting on D&D players in its place. Within a very short time, FR came to represent the Lorraine Williams school of gaming to my mind (and still does to an extent).
Although my views on FR have softened some, I still tend to think that GH had a better basic world and feel to it and that if the same resources had been put into developing GH, it would be as popular as FR is. Of course, the flip side to that is that I didn't much care for most of what happened during the 2E time frame (in fact, I gave up D&D for several years because of it), so it may be for the best that GH wasn't the focus of development during that period. If it had, it might have become extremely bastardized. At least the original GH set is still viable (all you really need to add are the 3E deities).
My main gripe with the way Greyhawk is relegated to the Forgotten Realms' "poor cousin". Sure, GH is the "default" setting, but there is an implication that GH is a bland, vanilla setting while FR is deep and interesting. Along with uneven treatment of GH as the "default" (I had a rather hard time trying to integrate the original adventure path modules into GH and Dungeon has intentionally decided that the second adventure path won't have any mention of GH) the current treatment of GH is almost insulting to long-time fans.
Since I mentioned the Realms, I might as well cover the hostility toward them, too (from my perspective, at least). During the 80s, when TSR was putting out a campaign setting every other week, I picked up the basic set of each, just to get ideas. FR was the only one that didn't really have anything interesting in it. I figured that FR would die a quick and painless death as it was probably the most illogicial, unattractive, and non-sensical setting I'd ever seen. Obviously, I was wrong, but my couple of attempts at playing in the setting did nothing if not convince me even more that the setting was lacking in value.
Well, FR happenned to come out about the time that TSR management really started to go down the tubes. To make a long story short (or not), for all appearances, TSR seemed to be doing their best to erase Gygax's world (Greyhawk) out of pure spite and push a different (obviously inferior, IMHO) setting on D&D players in its place. Within a very short time, FR came to represent the Lorraine Williams school of gaming to my mind (and still does to an extent).
Although my views on FR have softened some, I still tend to think that GH had a better basic world and feel to it and that if the same resources had been put into developing GH, it would be as popular as FR is. Of course, the flip side to that is that I didn't much care for most of what happened during the 2E time frame (in fact, I gave up D&D for several years because of it), so it may be for the best that GH wasn't the focus of development during that period. If it had, it might have become extremely bastardized. At least the original GH set is still viable (all you really need to add are the 3E deities).
Oberton
First Post
Moving on...
I moved away from Greyhawk sometime ago and went to FR. I soon tired of FR because of the constant changes and felt that I did not want to keep my world in sync with the FR CANON information. I then began to shop around for other settings and settled on HARN for a couple of years, but that did not really please me either. I am now using a product that has the GREYHAWK look and feel, but has source material being published. I think the Kenzer folks are doing a great job with Kingdoms of Kalamar, check it out!
I still play in the Greyhawk world under the RPGA setting, but I can’t find anyone who runs a Home Brew game in Greyhawk….
Later and GAME-ON
I moved away from Greyhawk sometime ago and went to FR. I soon tired of FR because of the constant changes and felt that I did not want to keep my world in sync with the FR CANON information. I then began to shop around for other settings and settled on HARN for a couple of years, but that did not really please me either. I am now using a product that has the GREYHAWK look and feel, but has source material being published. I think the Kenzer folks are doing a great job with Kingdoms of Kalamar, check it out!
I still play in the Greyhawk world under the RPGA setting, but I can’t find anyone who runs a Home Brew game in Greyhawk….
Later and GAME-ON
Aeolius
Adventurer
Perhaps when the revised 3e core rulebooks are released they should have a "Supporting the World of Greyhawk Campaign Setting" badge on the front covers, have the contents of the D&D Gazetteer in the PH, and an abridged Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (complete with 1-page map) in the DMG.
Similar Threads
