I've been reading a few reports from GenCon here and there, and there have been two instances in which posters have heard statements that WotC is looking to remove Greyhawk as the "core" setting for D&D.
Here are two of such posts:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=488063
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=487108
I'm rather upset about this despite the possibility of Greyhawk being available for third-party licensing when 4e come out (or so the rumor says).
Additionally, I'm not sure I want to wait for a new edition of D&D for my favorite setting to be more strongly supported.
I hope this is just air. I agree with your sentiments 100%!
This is my first post on the paizo forums so if there are any unwritten rules of ettiquette here that I am unaware of, please let me know.
The use of the greyhawk world as a core world has in some ways limited the scope of Greyhawk. It seems intended to be the vanilla setting and this has led to somewhat of a sacrosanct feel to the setting. Forgotten realms and other settings are able to be far more idiosyncratic and diverse because they are not tethered as closely. I love Greyhawk and have since the box. I welcome a drop to a third party and just hope it isn't White Wolf.
I currently use a hybrid system of Greyhawk and the Realms joined for millenia by portals so travel between them is routine.
It certainly saves time to not have to convert setting details. I found that it is very hard to make the players enjoy the Greyhawk setting in its own right. they seem to far prefer the Realms.
|
Obviously we'll have to wait for more definate information to trickle out, and I suspect a lot depends on the various legal wrangles Greyhawk's associated with.
I'm not sure, but I think my gut reaction to this is "good". Better that they let GH go -- say to Malhavoc or Necromancer -- than keep it in it's current state of limbo, at least it'll be a more alive than it currently is.
After 4ed? Ugh :( I don't see the need for it at the moment, and timing-wise it puts the disposal of GH a fair way in the future, I don't recall seeing any D&D material on the WotC release schedule after the start of 2006, so rough guess let's say end 2006/07 for the 4ed release, mid 07 for GH?
As for GH's relationship with Dragon & Dungeon, I suspect we can expect further non-use of various proper nouns as time goes by. Personally I think this is the real shame, Dragon & Dungeon have provided some great GH and GH-friendly material over the last couple of years, and I was starting to think the the way forward for GH was essentially magazine-based.
Lastly, although not unexpected (there had certainly been plenty of rumours that Paizo had received word from on high not to mention the G word) this does (admittedly slightly) clash with the assertion that "Greyhawk" and "Tenser" were changed in AoW to make it easier for FRers and Ebers to run the adventures.
I've been reading a few reports from GenCon here and there, and there have been two instances in which posters have heard statements that WotC is looking to remove Greyhawk as the "core" setting for D&D.
Yep, I remember reading that. Maybe I am wrong but my feeling was that it would be good for Greyhawk.
I understood it to mean that standard/core material would be presented without Greyhawk references (name of the spells or deities would be bland; i.e. "Mage's Grasping Hand" rather that "Bigby's Grasping Hand").
It would be the same for the PrC. Instead of "Champion of Pelor", you would have "Champion of the Sun".
That way you can adapt every bit more easily in other settings and Greyhawk does not get manipulated in all directions by non-Greyhawk fans who do whatever they feel like doing with the setting.
It is somehow an opportunity for Greyhawk to exist "on its own", as a real setting next to the FR and Eberron and not as the tasteless, standard thing that Core 3.5 products tended to present.
But we will need to see which direction WotC actually takes...
Bocklin
I think GH will remain in its current state of limbo (successes of LG notwithstanding).
WotC marketing has plainly stated that one of the reasons TSR folded was fragmentation of the market in terms of campaign settings (too many settings resulted in inadequate sales for any one milieu), and that they would not repeat that error. As a result, they decided to support a very limited number of campaigns, which didn't include GH.
If they believe their own claims, it would be foolish to help anyone take sales from FR or Eberron, which selling the (potentially profitable) rights to GH would do.
Just my two cents :)
Jack
Ahem.--Erik
Good morning Erik, welcome back from Gencon. Would you like to comment on this statement which was reported by someone on the WotC Boards? :
"After the session there was a question and answer period. I asked "If WOTC doesn't want you to mention GH City by name, it would seem they would just let Greyhawk go and have someone else develop it like Dragonlance or Ravenloft. Is there any chance of that happening?" Erik (Mona) said that he has asked for that very thing and he has been turned down. He said he was as baffled by it as the rest of us."
I am not sure what is meant by this poster (that's maybe a language thing).
What is the current situation with Greyhawk (as far as you can and are allowed to tell)?
Thanks for any comment!
Bocklin
I'm not really sure how I feal about this. I haven't seen anything since 3.5, or even 3.0 for that matter that progressed the world of GH. Actually, I prefer to not have to deal with the world changing events like in FR or Dark Sun, or even the whole GH Wars, Rary the Traitor Return of the Eight, type thing. Personally, I like the GH dieties, but I let Player mix and match dieties anyway so that doesn't really matter much. Refering to particulat locations within GH in an adventure...I'll take it or leave it depending on where I set the adventure myself. When I run an AP, I'll do my best to set it in the world it is designed for, but having Free City, or Free City of GH, doesn't really matter. I would prefer to have the various GH NPCs names used when that NPC is referenced. I can change Tencer to Billy Wonderboy easily enough if I want. But if the GH NPC name isn't used, I may not catch the replacement name and correctly pinpoint it to the proper NPC...if that even really matters. I don't want Elminster like characters running the world.
As far as GH settings I would like to see revisited and thus why I'd prefer to have GH remain the core setting,...
Valley of the Mage
Pamjarii (mispelled I know)
Blackmoor
There are probably others. One of the things I like the most about D&D is the portability of adventures. I'd hope that all adventures would contain info on placing the adventure in GH/FR/E or what ever other worlds WotC supports.
Would People like to se GH setting books like the FR books?
Silver Marches
Unaproachable East
Serpent Kingdoms
etc..
ASEO out
And as a bit of a follow-up, the more someone does with GH, the harder it becomes to mesh with LG. I think that, from RPGA's point of view, this is worth worrying about.
If LG starts diverging from GH canon it will start losing some of its appeal -- currently players can count on what they are doing being part of the official world (as much as is possible in a Living Campaign).
Regards,
Jack
And as a bit of a follow-up, the more someone does with GH, the harder it becomes to mesh with LG. I think that, from RPGA's point of view, this is worth worrying about.
If LG starts diverging from GH canon it will start losing some of its appeal -- currently players can count on what they are doing being part of the official world (as much as is possible in a Living Campaign).
Every RPGA event I tried gaming in turned out to be a monty haul/munchkin/power gamer fest where the players collected "certs" and every adventure was completed purely based on the hoard of magical items each character was lugging around. Man was I disapointed.
How does cannon time flow in GH. Each of our years one GH year passes? Does time pass on a cannon level? What GH year did 3.0 come out in...3.5? Is there a secquence of events that gets published each GH year so that DMs can know what has cannonly transpired in GH?
ASEO out
Ahem.
Sorry, Erik. I love your Greyhawk stuff, but last I checked Gary Gygax and Rob Kuntz were doing work for Troll Lord Games' superb Castles & Crusades system. Those are two great tastes that taste damn great together, so I know who my dream GH license would go to.
Deluxe hardbound version of Gary Gygax's Greyhawk and Dave Arneson's Blackmoor on my bookshelf...Droooooooooooooooool.
If they both disappeared tomorrow, you'd definitely get the nod, though.
I don't know all the details about LG administration, but I do know that there is some degree of cooperation among LG Triads, and thus some (small) level of coordination on the overall history.
And yes, one real year is one game year (currently in CY 595).
It's not clear to me how much WotC considers LG canon (if at all), but there are quite a few GH fans out there; I think they would lose a lot of interest if WotC let them believe that what was transpiring in LG wasn't canonical.
Since LG seems to be going strong, I think it's in WotC's interest to not rock that boat.
For what it's all worth,
Jack
|
Not to sound like an overly eager noob here, but to be honest, I would prefer to see GH fall into the capable hands of Paizo. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Gary Gygax and the rich history of Greyhawk but with Paizo's resources and depth of knowledge, just imagine what they could do. The adventures and maps to date are nothing short of incredible and it can only get better, IMHO. My vote: Paizo.
Not to sound like an overly eager noob here, but to be honest, I would prefer to see GH fall into the capable hands of Paizo. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Gary Gygax and the rich history of Greyhawk but with Paizo's resources and depth of knowledge, just imagine what they could do. The adventures and maps to date are nothing short of incredible and it can only get better, IMHO. My vote: Paizo.
I dunno. "Depth of knowledge?" I would venture to say that Gary and Rob literally know more info about Greyhawk just from participating in the original campaigns than has ever been published for an outside party like the Paizo staff to study in the first place.
|
|
I dunno. "Depth of knowledge?" I would venture to say that Gary and Rob literally know more info about Greyhawk just from participating in the original campaigns than has ever been published for an outside party like the Paizo staff to study in the first place.
Very true. I think it is a safe to say that Gary and Rob both possess treasure troves of GH information locked away in 3-ring binders of holding somewhere. In a perfect world, a "dream team" could be assembled to compile and write for a new GH campaign. The question is, who do you draft for the team? (sorry, no intention to hi-jack. perhaps I'll take that question to a new thread)
Aseo, you said you'd like to see Blackmoor developed more.
I picked up "Blackmoor" D20 written by Dave Arneson and it's very good..unusual, but good and certainly worth exploring as a Campaign setting.
|
|
I've two main gripes with LG.
1 -- style of play -- they're short & highly directed games, little roleplaying, minimaxed characters, etc. This is fun at times, but it can't compare to "proper" games.
2 -- access to material -- you've only got any access to most LG material (eg the scenarios, storyline details etc) if you're an LGer and playing LG games, in your "official" region. You have to request scenarios from the RPGA and report back to them before you're allowed to run any more LG adventures. To the best of my knowledge the RPGA won't allow even out-of-date adventures to be made publically available. I've no way of knowing what's happened, officially, in GH in 591-595CY, at best I've got access to a couple of years worth of current Onnwal scenarios.
I liked the original idea of Living Greyhawk, and for the first couple of years I thought it had great potential, over the last few years that's changed. Nowadays, I like the fact that a lot of people have done some great work there, but I don't see very much real benefit having come from it.
I may be just repeating what has already said, but if so, I will just voice my agreement. I started playing D&D with 3.5, so I definitely do not have the, shall we say, older, perspective on Grayhawk & D&D in general. But, I have not even considered running a campaign in Greyhawk just because it seems to be bland. The deities are fine, but there is no map included with the players handbook, and the general mistreatment has just put me off. I would definitely want what is best for Greyhawk, just because I feel like I am missing out on alot of D&Ds history.
Okay, I'll stop ranting now. :)
WaterdhavianFlapjack
LG games are by far the most popular RPGA events I've encountered. The face that so many authors have contributed to it for so many years, the triad system, regional control and the fact that there's no "official" new canon to contradict the adventures are all strong reasons for its success.
There are more Greyhawk adventures written for LG than any other campaign setting I can think of, not only for 3rd edition but perhaps ANY edition of D&D.
WotC may decide to drop Greyhawk in favor of Eberron or FR as the default setting. If they do this I wouldn't be surprised if they did not sell the rights and instead gave more creative control to the RPGA.
How does this tie into stories about WotC buying back Ravenloft?
IMO, it would be smarter for them to stop segmenting the market with so many "official" D&D setting books and instead focus on one or two settings (Eberron & FR). Paizo should follow their lead if this happens and drop Greyhawk too.
IMO, it would be smarter for them to stop segmenting the market with so many "official" D&D setting books and instead focus on one or two settings (Eberron & FR). Paizo should follow their lead if this happens and drop Greyhawk too.
BLASPHEMY!!!
|
|
IMO, it would be smarter for them to stop segmenting the market with so many "official" D&D setting books and instead focus on one or two settings (Eberron & FR). Paizo should follow their lead if this happens and drop Greyhawk too.BLASPHEMY!!!
Amen brother! Amem!
Fight the power brothers and sisters! Long live the World of Greyhawk!
As a long time Greyhawk fan, I would love it if Paizo got the license to do Greyhawk. They have been doing a very good job with Shackled City and Age of Worms (although Age of Worms has more of a Greyhawk flavor to me). As for RPGA canon, I don't really care. I was never impressed with their games.
|
|
If the rights to publish Greyhawk were to become available, you can bet that Paizo would go after them. We have asked about it in the past on a couple of occasions, and the rights have never been available.
Given the quality of the GH material that's appeared in Dragon & Dungeon over the last couple of years I think many people would be very happy for Paizo to get hold of it.
So what we (we GHers that is) need to do now then is stop complaining to WotC about the lack of GH material & saying what a great setting it is, and start telling them that it's a dusty old setting, that there's far too much coverage of it, and that they should drop it as soon as possible! ;)
IMO, it would be smarter for them to stop segmenting the market ...BLASPHEMY!!!
Double Blasphemy! I'm still wishing for a unified Mystara Campaign manual. That's one I will never see.
I have to admit. I'm surprised by WotC dropping support but not too much. FR and Eberron seem to be their thing now. Which is too bad for them as neither setting get me excited. Now GH and Mystara, that's adventuring!
--Ray.
If Paizo took over GH and WotC kept FR and/or Eberron, wouldn't it possibly be the best of both worlds?
More support for all those game settings? The FR/Eberron gamers could get their stuff from Wizards products and Paizo could knock out some awesome Greyhawk stuff, if the SCAP HC is any indication of what they can do.
More for all those worlds, with a clearer indication of who to go to to get stuff for your favorite setting.
I've never worried about the RPGA and sanctioned Greyhawk anything...there's no way I could keep up with that so I don't even try.
If ditching Greyhawk as the standard means all the books have to change and be rebought i think it is the worset idea ever thought up. Greyhawk is by nature bland (in the cores at least) so that all rules can be moved into another setting. A lss would not really make that much of a differance; though a change just seems like a bad idea.
Still have the question:
How does cannon time flow in GH. Each of our years one GH year passes? Does time pass on a cannon level? What GH year did 3.0 come out in...3.5? Is there a secquence of events that gets published each GH year so that DMs can know what has cannonly transpired in GH as time in the campaign progresses...if it does progress?
ASEO out
|
|
Oh, man, I would LOVE to see Paizo and Erik Mona get hold of Greyhawk. Clearly, from the Adventure Path stuff, we've got some real Greyhawk people at Paizo. Plus, some of Paizo's regulars, Sean Reynolds and Eric Boyd and on and on, are Greyhawk savvy. I think that would be the best thing that could happen to Greyhawk.
Let us not forget, however, that the role of Dungeon and Dragon magazines is to (largely) support the core world of D&D and help market new WoC products. If WoC gave up the Greyhawk license so that it was (1) no longer core, and (2) had no new material coming out from them (not like there is any anyway), it would virtually vanish from the pages of Dungeon and Dragon magazines. Now, since Erik Mona is the Editor of Dungeon, would he leave to work on Greyhawk products or stay with the magazine? Who knows. Similarly, with the other Greyhawk savvy staff at Paizo. It could be a bunch of clueless novices end up with the setting in their hands.
Also, many people in the past have argued/shown that it is unprofitable to publish adventures. So, Paizo would likely publish the occasional source book for Greyhawk (like other people did with Ravenloft), but there would be no adventures. Personally, I think adventures MAKE Greyhawk. I would much rather see it remain in the pages of Dungeon where we could continue to get quality adventures.
|
|
Personally, I think adventures MAKE Greyhawk. I would much rather see it remain in the pages of Dungeon where we could continue to get quality adventures.
I agree about the adventures making Greyhawk. For Greyhawk, especially the early days, that was the source of all information, rather than "supplement books." I prefer getting my information about the setting from adventures over reading encyclopedia-ish setting books.
And I don't think that anyone would have to leave anywhere. Paizo would, hopefully, get permission to say the G-word in the magazines and things would rock on as normal. I am not sure that Erik could handle two magazines and be lead on a new product line roll-out. He is where he needs to be, because the magazines are the best they've ever been, and he's sneaking us Greyhawkers our fixes under the radar. I mean, Diamond Lake and the Cairn Hills? The Free City? C'mon. That ain't Sharn they're talking about.
Well, let Paizo continue to publish both Dungeon and Dragon magazines for the John Q. Roleplayer.
If the Shackled City Hardcover does well then Paizo flexes a bit more of it's "publisher muscle." This would mean that they are successful with harcover books as well and could make a pretty strong run for the Greyhawk license.
If WotC sees them as a viable publisher who will treat the setting well enough to make money, I say let them pick up the rights.
And who knows? Perhaps Mrrs. Mona, Gygax, and Kuntz can all collaborate together!
And who knows? Perhaps Mrrs. Mona, Gygax, and Kuntz can all collaborate together!
Well, Kuntz is already on good term with Paizo (Maure Castle + follow up), and it seems he is working on another project with them. So it might be another trump card for Paizo.
I read somewhere else that Mr. Gygax, might not be able to take part in a GH revival because of his current health situation. I do not know if this is true, but it would definitely be a sad thing.
Bocklin
If WotC drops Greyhawk, I personally don't want to see it in Dungeon or Dragon except for the Campaign Classics issues. One of the issues I have with Dungeon is that I buy WotC books and look to Dungeon for adventures to support these new toys. I can understand using Greyhawk because it's the "default setting", but please don't provide life support if WotC drops it altogether. If Paizo wants Greyhawk to be their personal project then make a new magazine or series of modules and see if it sells as well as Dungeon.
Takasi,
As I typed earlier...
Let them to continue to publish the two mag's for the generic setting in mind.
With the release of the hardcover it seems that Paizo is becoming a publisher of some reknown that could publish books as WELL as magazines. The Greyhawk setting would be a book-line, while keeping the magazines completely sterile and devoid of any campaign.
N.B.: I have noticed the crap-load of Eberron mini's in the WotC lines as of late... I'm thinking that they're going to push that setting as the new D&D campaign setting - the Realms will always have a strong following with the novels and sourcebooks.
I love the GreyHawk setting but you are right it is hard to compete with the Relms because well most player like being over shadowed by the Walking Gods the FR call NPCs....personally I was able to get my group away from the realms with the new Eberron Setting where you can get more into the mode of political power vs raw power and such. I like the ideal that NPCs could weild vast power but still be essentially low leveled. Just like The Lord Mayor of Greyhawk was only lvl 9 thief in first edition and second edition. SO if they must let go of a tradtion like GreyHawk,the origonal core setting, to keep it alive i hope you guy a Paizo get the right because you will do it right. GreyHawk has be and ever shall be my favorite seting to many memeories and years, 16 in fact, of fun were spent there.
One thing I really like about GH is that it is not as fleshed out or influenced by new novels as DL or FR. Now I would not mind seeing some books along the lines of the FR hard backs covering various areas of GH, but I think those should almost be more like adventures with additional backgrounds covering very specific and non world changing areas of GH like the Barrier Peaks (which could provide a bit more background on the spaceship crashed there ant it's relation to Blackmoor/The Temple of the Frog/The City of the Gods. By keeping the Background books to more remote regions, you have less chance of FRing GH, yet still illuminating the world so that play is enhanced.
Perhaps if X4/5/10 were done, it could be Rary and Robolar leading the forces out of the blight desert (or which ever desert they are hiding in at the moment...I don't have any of my books with me)
Maybe a series of Nautical adventures would also be good...nothing like that wrotten "Black Sails over Freeport" Once again, something on the fringe of the world that doesn't have world shaking reprocussions, but that lets the PCs get into a new enviroment and specialize accordingly.
ASEO out
|
I currently use a hybrid system of Greyhawk and the Realms joined for millenia by portals so travel between them is routine.
See, this is why they need to bring back Spelljammer. With that campaign, you could have parties adventure in any of the other campaign worlds, AND find fun and adventure out in space. That way, even travel between say Oerth and Toril was exciting, not just "you step through the portal."
I just mentioned this in the Ravenloft reverts thread, but I would hope to see WOTC come up with a similar policy for Ravenloft and Greyhawk that they did with DragonLance. WOTC could put out a core hardcover Greyhawk book to set the tone of the setting, then license out the setting to a 3rd party, much like they did with DragonLance. Then Greyhawk can still be marketed as an official "D&D" setting, not a "Sword and Sorcery" or whatever product.
Perhaps if X4/5/10 were done, it could be Rary and Robolar leading the forces out of the blight desert (or which ever desert they are hiding in at the moment...I don't have any of my books with me)
Now that would be interesting. :) I though of a similiar situation when Dungeon did that series of articles on Rary and Blight Desert. It wouldn't be the same as X4/X5/X10 but a similiar and just as cool senario. If that were published, I know I would probably be adding my favorite encounters from the Master series.
--Ray.
I've played GH since the late 1970's using only sporadic published materials throughout 2nd Edition; I've yet to even see any 3.0 or 3.5 d20 material on GH.
I don't know what people mean by 'bland', but I've played GH over FR, Ebberon or any other setting without complaint by me or player alike - the world is what the DM makes of it.
I learned years ago how to avoid playing the "buy the current rule system and keep our business afloat" game...
...Squad Leader, anyone?
My total expenditures on gaming materials over the years probably totals less than $100; not necessarily by choice, but I got by - and will still get by.
GH has been my 'Core Campaign Setting' for 25 years and nothing will change anytime soon - since whomever publishes with the rights will have absolutely no bearing on which setting I use or don't use.
M
If the rights to publish Greyhawk were to become available, you can bet that Paizo would go after them. We have asked about it in the past on a couple of occasions, and the rights have never been available.
--Erik
I think this would be the best thing that could happen but I have to wonder if that would be the end of Greyhawk in Dungeon magazine. Obviously if the Shackled City is a preview of published adventure material we could get our Greyhawk adventures in a more permanent form and with some great authors in the stable. Still it would be sad to see Greyhawk completely gone from Dragon and Dungeon.
My total expenditures on gaming materials over the years probably totals less than $100; not necessarily by choice, but I got by - and will still get by.
M
Man, I probably drop $50 a month on D&D stuff, and have been doing that for like the last 5-10 years (excluding times that I was in locations where I could not feed my addictio...um...hobby) Part of it is that I don't use a published campaign, but build my own and fill it with adventures from all over. I like the flexability of having a great adventure available for where ever my players take their characters...and I don't have the time to write my own adventures any more. That being said, I like to read D&D stuff even if I know that their is a small liklyhood that it will make it into my games...but sooner or later I think at least part of everything I own has gotten some play, or been waiting in the "on call" box should the PCs open door X.
Still, I would like to learn more about GH and I think that by having adventrues set itn the world and the areas around the adventure detailed, the world gains strength beyond just a nice Gazetter to read, but an adventure/location/enviroment to explore.
Give me something to play, not just something to read.
ASEO