I must ask, however, is it wise for Greyhawk to remain the "core" setting for 3E D&D when it gets no published product support. I mean, I know LG supports Greyhawk in its journals and is keeping the setting alive, but does Greyhawk deserve to be the core setting for 3E D&D when it has no WotC sourcebooks being produced for it?
I know this is sacrilege, but would it make more sense for the core 3E D&D setting to now be Forgotten Realms, for example? Remove all reference to Mordenkainen, Bigby, etc. and just have spells called "Disjunction", "Clenched Fist", "Acid Arrow".
I wonder how many beginning players pick up the core D&D rules and crave to find out more about Greyhawk without having to subscribe to the RPGA.
Thankfully we all have access to the LG Gazetteer. I mean, this has a wealth of information in it and, to be honest, it's all I really use. Nevertheless, product support -- as in comercially sold books published by WotC -- keeps the campaign even more viable.
At the moment I feel Greyhawk has been dismisively pushed to one side. Is Greyhawk really THAT unpopular?
GH is antiquated for WotC's purposes. GH is put out to stud as it were and being made the default Core setting is akin to placing it on a mantle for all to see but not truly touch. Those who really want to know more about GH will go the extra distance, to Living Greyhawk, to Dungeon or buying the OOP stuff. The rest will still at least know GH existed while they play their Eberron or homebrews or whatever.
I suspect somewhere down the road one of two or both things will happen: One, FR will get to an age where it will become the Core setting of an eventual 4th edition. Two, GH will sluff off and hopefully be picked up as a 3rd party product and then take off again. GH has already shown its resiliency when it was canceled and I am confident it will outlast them all.
It could be argued that all the supplements produced for "core D&D" are Greyhawk supplements - however I agree that it has a lack of support.
Personally, while I think that Greyhawk has been placed as the "generic" D&D world, WotC are still using FR as their flagship - just as in AD&D 2nd - and are leaving Greyhawk to the RPGA.
I actually prefer this as it means that I get to do what I want to do with the world rather than having to deal with WotC updating the timeline all the time (as they do with FR).
I play D&D with a group of people who know little to nothing of Greyhawk, which for my DM sessions has been great since the world is something new and fresh for them and I can manipulated to my liking. They grew up with FR. I have played in the FR world and find so many GH undertones. They had to do much to make FR different. I think this is why they created the Novels and Characters like Drizzt't to give FR some differences and depth largely because when it first came out, to me anyway, it was Greyhawk with a different skin.
I also find it interesting that one of the most powerful races to influence the game, The Drow (a Gygax creation in Greyhawk) has in many ways come to define much of FR. Many of the major gods of the Races are Greyhawk’s as are a number of human gods.
Greyhawk is, dispite what people may remember or believe, a major influence on the worlds created to day. I personally believe that Ravenloft was as much inspired by the vampire ruled planed in Q1 as by the books. Even if a world tries not to be like Greyhawk this ultimately causes it to be influence by Greyhawk.
I fully intend to buy Eberron and shamelessly use it in my Greyhawk campaigning. I treat FR as a satellite lesser plane of Greyhawk and see no reason that Eberron should treated any less.
Hasbro and WOTC are driven by and prisoners of the market. They need to constantly create new things to sell to the public (or so they believe) to keep shareholders happy. Their view and focus is thus by default narrow and short. I think it would be great if a Third Party did takeover Greyhawk in fact all of Oerth and went step further by making it Open Source. All the histories, modules, and let people go nuts with their ideas. Let it flourish with Forums like Canonfire. There is so much of in Greyhawk it would take a lifetime to live it all. I have been playing D&D in Greyhawk for twenty years and I know I have touch only a third of its potential
Lastly I believe that we as players and DM(GM)s are responsible for the worlds we play in and create not Gary, not Hasbro, not WOTC or other gaming companies. I very glad that this forum and web site exist to help me. It is a wonderful opportunity to make Greyhawk really grow. Gary made the game. It is up to us to use it wisely and have fun with it. And I know that no matter where, in the endless universe I play, Greyhawk is always home.
I personally believe that Ravenloft was as much inspired by the vampire ruled planed in Q1 as by the books.
Actually the Ravenloft setting is acknowledged to be derived from the original modules I8: Ravenloft and I10: Ravenloft; the House on Gryphon Hill. Those are in turn derived from Dracula and other 1890's horror/adventure stories. I personally doubt that Q1 had much to do with it at all - the back stories are just too different.
Greyhawk is not the 'core D&D' world. Parts of it have been plagiarized and modified for use in the core world. But if you look at the D&D pantheon carefully, you'll notice that those gods are not actually the same as their Greyhawk antecedents. St. Cuthbert in 'core D&D' is the god of retribution, whereas he's the god of common sense and duty in Greyhawk (Trithereon is the god of Retribution). Wee Jas is made to sound more undead friendly in the core pantheon than she is generally portrayed in Greyhawk. Lolth is clearly the FR exiled elf goddess, not the Greyhawk demoness.
Nothing in the core rules directly refers to Greyhawk, afaik. None of the nations, ethnicities, languages, or anything else.
The drow are derived from Celtic myths. They are no more a Gygax creation than dwarves or halflings.
Well, that's rather an oversimplification, too. The norse influence is pretty strong; arguably stronger than the celtic. And the intermediary of tolkein's few dark elves (like Eol and Maeglin) shouldn't be discounted.
However, the main concepts of the fantasy gaming race 'drow' are quite clearly a Gygax/Greyhawk era creation of TSR. The culture and appearance of the drow have little to do with any of the mythic antecedents. And the FR did quite clearly make a centerpiece out of what was essentially a minor sideshow for Greyhawk.
Vendui. I agree. Who would've thought Drow would be such a hit? Drow would've been a sideshow in FR as well if not for Drizzt's novel success. IIRC the gray FR boxset didn't emphasize them as a major player until after RA Salvatore made them a household name(I'm sure we've all seen the Drow language translators). Ed didn't pluck them from Norse or Celtic myth, his direct influence had to be Erehli Cinlu and the surface scheming Drow of early GH lore. These were the certainly the pattern for Menzoberranzan and Drizzt. So now if LG emphasizes the Drow of Oerth, much like in Weining's LGJ articles, does it seem like too little too late?
Well, that's rather an oversimplification, too. The norse influence is pretty strong; arguably stronger than the celtic. And the intermediary of tolkein's few dark elves (like Eol and Maeglin) shouldn't be discounted.
However, the main concepts of the fantasy gaming race 'drow' are quite clearly a Gygax/Greyhawk era creation of TSR. The culture and appearance of the drow have little to do with any of the mythic antecedents. And the FR did quite clearly make a centerpiece out of what was essentially a minor sideshow for Greyhawk.
Tolkien's dark elves were only culturally different from the light elves. The distinction between light and dark being whether they had been to Valinor and in the light of the two trees.
And yes, the norse influence is strong. The norse influenced a lot of celtic culture. The drow just seem to me to be much more drawn from the mythic versions than the tolkien versions, though. The appearance is the real key. Drough are negatives to the Alfar positive. Although good or evil were not really applicable. They were just alien, like all of the sidhe. ... Ok, now I think I'm rambling and way off topic.
In any event, it is difficult for me to see FR as ripping off the drow from Greyhawk. At least any moreso than ripping off dwarves and halflings. Both worlds are based on standard AD&D rules, so there are going to be similarities.
Those who really want to know more about GH will go the extra distance, to Living Greyhawk, to Dungeon or buying the OOP stuff.
That view of GH players likely had something to do with the decision. There's not a lot of need for the company to go to extremes to keep the diehard fans. They've pretty much got them no matter what. The emphasis seems to be on producing shinies to attract new (and hopefully young) players. The supplements also seem concentrated on new player abilities and powers instead of expanded cultural information for settings. Everything seems more geared to the roll-player than the roleplayer. I'm not saying that power-gaming or hack and slash are intrinsincally worse than roleplaying. I just think that GH is less geared towards the "crunchy" than the other published worlds. Having it as the default setting sort of makes sense. It is the setting most suited to the DM who is willing to do most of his own work.
Greyhawk is not the 'core D&D' world. Parts of it have been plagiarized and modified for use in the core world. But if you look at the D&D pantheon carefully, you'll notice that those gods are not actually the same as their Greyhawk antecedents. St. Cuthbert in 'core D&D' is the god of retribution, whereas he's the god of common sense and duty in Greyhawk (Trithereon is the god of Retribution). Wee Jas is made to sound more undead friendly in the core pantheon than she is generally portrayed in Greyhawk. Lolth is clearly the FR exiled elf goddess, not the Greyhawk demoness.
Nothing in the core rules directly refers to Greyhawk, afaik. None of the nations, ethnicities, languages, or anything else.
Aloha
Vormaerin
LG accepts all the core material to be Greyhawk material. It may not agree with previous editions of GH, but what appears in 3E books is now the GH standard.
The RPGA also accepts a lot of stuff made up off the top of their heads and/or pulled out of their nether regions as part of their LG campaign, too. Although given some corporate support, the LG is just a very large house campaign and has a lot of house rules and home brewed content.
The LG Gazeteer and Journals are canonical, being as they were vetted and published by WotC. The rest of the LG materials are not. Anyway, if you look at the "D&D Pantheon" in Dieties and Demigods and compare it to the diety write ups in the LGG, you'll find the very same conflicts I mentioned in my previous post.
Core material is designed to be used anywhere that is a more or less 'normal' fantasy world. It is (with some tailoring) compatible with Greyhawk. Just as it would be with the Realms. And will be with the new world that might be in the works. It is not, however, "of" Greyhawk (or anywhere else).
In any event, it is difficult for me to see FR as ripping off the drow from Greyhawk. At least any moreso than ripping off dwarves and halflings. Both worlds are based on standard AD&D rules, so there are going to be similarities.
Well, "ripped off" would be a pretty harsh way of describing it, considering that the drow are generic D&D monster as of the original Fiend Folio. Though, to be nitpicky, the dwarves and halflings were introduced in the core rules (PHB, MM), whereas the Drow were introduced in a Greyhawk campaign module series. And the FR's drow adhere more closely to that model than their dwarves or halflings (or surface elves, for that matter) do to their Greyhawk equivalents.
But that wasn't the original poster's assertion, anyway. Its just interesting that the D series of mods bore the most fruit in the FR.
Core material is designed to be used anywhere that is a more or less 'normal' fantasy world. It is (with some tailoring) compatible with Greyhawk. Just as it would be with the Realms. And will be with the new world that might be in the works. It is not, however, "of" Greyhawk (or anywhere else).
Doesn't the "D&D Gazetteer", that features GH as "the D&D world," prove that Greyhawk is the core world?
I've also seen a number of supplements that directly link into the GH world. For example, in Sword and Fist, there is a Knight of the Great Kingdom.
I think the folks of WotC would say that the core rules are designed to be generic but GH is, indeed, the core world. True, it isn't shoved down your throat, but it's there nonetheless as a pale background.
The supplements such as Sword and Fist, Epic Level Handbook, and other such things touch on Greyhawk. Not as much as they do on the FR, but they do touch on them.
If you want a clear idea of where WotC puts Greyhawk in their thinking, just look at where they put the Greyhawk forum on their website. Its in this forum category:
Other Roleplaying Worlds
Wizards doesn't produce new material for these worlds anymore, but plenty of fans do. Take a look. And be sure to check out the Homebrew board to see what original material game design hobbyists are coming up with.
Right along with Mystara, Planescape, and Birthright.
The supplements such as Sword and Fist, Epic Level Handbook, and other such things touch on Greyhawk. Not as much as they do on the FR, but they do touch on them.
If you want a clear idea of where WotC puts Greyhawk in their thinking, just look at where they put the Greyhawk forum on their website. Its in this forum category:
Other Roleplaying Worlds
Wizards doesn't produce new material for these worlds anymore, but plenty of fans do. Take a look. And be sure to check out the Homebrew board to see what original material game design hobbyists are coming up with.
Right along with Mystara, Planescape, and Birthright.
GH may not be being developed in an official sense but it is still there as a default world for D&D. What has already been designed is used as a background, albeit very generic one, for core D&D.
So they may not *technically* produce material for it but it is still the core D&D world.
Also, the Epic Level Handbook only touches on FR in the Appendix. It does not affect, or form background, for the rules presented in that book.
In fact, no generic D&D book ever directly refers to FR or Dragonlance. We do, however, see direct links to the GH campaign when they are generic enough. For example, god's names, Knight of the Great Kingdom, etc.
So I still believe GH is the core D&D world, it's just not being "developed" in the traditional sense with campaign heavy information and product branding.
Uhh, so that means what? No products are being produced that use greyhawk material, the website declares it an unsupported milieu, the only source material published for 3e relates specifically to the RPGA's house campaign, and so on. THe only 'use' Greyhawk has is as a source for examples, which are often heavily modified from the original so they serve the purposes of a 'generic' world. If you didn't know about Greyhawk already, would ANYTHING in the core clue you in about it?
Greyhawk derived examples are used for one reason and one reason only: they allow WotC to provide 'generic' examples of various things without having to worry about messing up the Realms' consistency. There is no effort to make this 'core' material compatible with existing GH lore. They just use the names when names are useful and alter them at will for the purposes of making the examples work.
If that's "core", its pretty strange way to use the word, imho.
Greyhawk derived examples are used for one reason and one reason only: they allow WotC to provide 'generic' examples of various things without having to worry about messing up the Realms' consistency.
I'm not an IP specialist, but it probably allows them to retain all their IP rights easier as well? _________________ Kneel before me, or you shall be KNELT!
THe only 'use' Greyhawk has is as a source for examples, which are often heavily modified from the original so they serve the purposes of a 'generic' world. If you didn't know about Greyhawk already, would ANYTHING in the core clue you in about it?
If you wanted to find out more, you'd buy the "D&D Gazetteer" featuring the GH world.
You have to love it when people revive otherwise dead threads. GH will never really be dead, as long we we're around talking about it, creating new stuff, and using it in other games. I have pbem going in which the players are all new to gh. In two years, they've come to know it pretty well, at least I hope. A couple have kids, and they are about to get them into DnD pretty soon. It seems likely they will play with GH, using the old boxed set.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
