HOLY SMOKE you nailed it on the noggin for me. THAT is EXACTLY why I never like FR.- Darker, and grittier. "Feels" more like DnD to me, in a lot of ways. Sometimes, FR feels a little too harry potterish to me.
Hmmmmm... I wouldn't call FR Harry Potterish. FR seems a bit more DC comics-ish to me. Heroes really are heroes and are respected. Heroes all have their own hometown stomping grounds. That sort of thing.
I would go so far as to rank Harry Potter as darker than FR, even if there are some pretty fantastic elements in wizard society. That wizard society, nevertheless, has a lot of warts.
who eats french vanilla when there is mint chochlate chip
Me. Much as I like mint chocolate chip, a really good french vanilla is sublime. But then, I consider vanilla to be a very sensual and sexy aroma.
Well, I did love the Realms. I bought the grey box when it came out 20 some years ago and never went anywhere else for a fantasy setting. Until now, after what they did to it in 4e.
But you still have the grey box and it's still good. ;)
So, sell me on the Pathfinder campaign setting. What makes it different from 'generic' FRPG settings like Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk?
Its authors does not pretend as much that their world makes sense, I guess. Also, it is more grimdark (granted, FR is a pretty horrible place to live, too). Otherwise, it is even more of a kitchen sink setting, and it is still a low-level setting that pretends to be a high-level one.
|
I like Golarion because it's so American - and I say that in a good way. I'm a European from Balkans, and many of the old myths are kinda reality for me. I'm a member of an old religion masked as christianity, but with all the trappings of paganism - and that goes for the most of rural Europe. Golarion is so much like the golden age of sf, when everything was sf, including Conan and Lovcraftian horrors, and that makes it different and new and interesting. Don't get me wrong: I love Eberron and Midnight settings, but they have a different feel to them. I will not place all my games in Golarion, but probably most of them.
While I like having a wide variety of locales for adventuring in, there is something to be said for logical design when creating a game world. For instance, if one country had 17th century technology and a neighbouring country had 7th century technology, I'd have to wonder why. Similarly, if there's a high-magic country that's described as having an army of enslaved efreet and noble djinn, I'd have to wonder why they wouldn't have taken a neighbouring low-magic country.
QFT. Also, Golarion is as guilty of disregarding the true scope of abilities that DnD characters (and monsters) have as Forgotten Realms. When you have whole magical empires that summon outsiders left, right and center, why there are armies that march on foot, instead of teleporting kill squads, for example? (Or why the countries that have only the former aren't casually subjugated by the countries that have the latter?) When you have races of shapechangers that universally are kick-ass warriors and spellcasters by virtue of being born, why they don't control human societies at least in some areas? Etc, etc.
|
Many of you have summed this up so well and I feel I'm writing this more for those that have put the time and effort into making such a well crafted campaign world and system to play it in.
I have been a DM for over 18 years and I started by running Greyhawk. After some time I moved on to Realms. I liked Realms for a long time being a R.A. Salvatore reader but the world lost its shine to me after awhile. I felt boxed in by the knowledge players had on the world. Anytime I wanted to changed something written in Realms history there was someone fighting against it. It started to remind me of Star Wars arguments. So I turned to making my own world.
Now in Golarion the book gives you ideas not solid lines. Entries though out the do a phenomenal job with culture and how the civilizations view one another. The gods are there to work for the player and DM but not to hamper their creativeness. Thankfully what they don't do is leave this locked in set of history that players feel can't be changed. The world has some serious thought put into it. Each country is a life all its own and they did a great job capturing the individual feel of them without over burdening the reader.
As a DM I enjoy layout of the campaign book more than I have any other published world over 3.5s lifespan. Everything is easy to find. The book its self is build solid and the art is fantastic! As writers they have years of building a rock solid foundation while publishing Dungeon and Dragon magazines. Not to even mention the Pathfinder series. Paizo also makes it so a new DM or a Vet can run a game in the world while feeling at home with a minimal amount of study.
Above all else they care what the people playing and buying think. This is what we all have wanted in a company and in a campaign world. I mean look at it, they put an open beta out for the system and are extremely active on the boards. Not only did they listen but the implemented things we wanted to see. How often do we as the players, fans and supporters do we get this out of our hobby now days.
Great job guys and keep it up!
YEP! I much prefer reading stories about lower level guys than epic ones. Conan being an exception, though I still figure he was about 15th level with a STR of about 18(00)*wonders how many catch that reference?*
Conan was around 5-6th by the end of his career. At 15th level you're expected to easily solo creatures three times your height, who are significantly more agile than an average human, whose skin offers much better protection than any non-magical armor (and who wear armor, too) and who can meet you with stone-shattering lightning blasts. By attacking these creatures head-on. Several of them, if the fight is supposed to be equal. And these creatures are not that formidable for their CR.
That's what "low-level setting, pretending to be a high-level one" means, by the way. When you have two-digits levels given to guys like Conan, or, often, much less impressive, because an adventure author felt like so (or wanted to quickly create opponents for PCs).
|
Bordering nation technologies don't bother me too much, because it's a 'moment in time' thing. If my country has mechanised agriculture -- say, tractors -- it could be a reasonable while before your agriculture ends up that way, because you need a bunch of infrastructure (supply of tractor parts, tractor service and repair expertise, and good roads to get stuff around; this is even moreso if you want the production of the things to happen locally, as expressed in the story "I, pencil", beloved of libertarians everywhere). This would be particularly true if your country and mine didn't get on enormously well (presumably we'd have to be somewhat larger to make up for your wartime technology advantage). Particularly true again if there's magic around, because some technological tasks can be achieved magically anyhow (indeed, magiclessnenss is the explanation for the most technologically advanced society in Golarion, right, which borders one where they have a lot of undead to do manual labour...).
Technological goodies will cross over as rare imports and rich people might also import experts who can maintain them, but countrywide adoption will be slower. You're seeing a snapshot and that's before considering the fact that different countries are contextually different (look at modern-day India for a large divide between urban life and rural life in terms of technological advancement; a country with less urban life would have more of that rural stuff and things might be really slow to change).
That's not intended to be a rigorous argument or a discourse about historical spread of technology, incidentally -- I know a reasonable amount about the History of Science, but history of technology isn't my expertise -- just how, for me, it works in Golarion. Given that these techological differences are great for game flavour, this is me rationalising how they might exist. Golarion is like our real world in some respects, but it isn't actually our real world...
|
Others here have echoed my sentiments of Golarion love. I adore telling folks how, just before Rise of the Runelords came out, I was fretting how to shoehorn it into Forgotten Realms. It took about 3 hours of reading to decide I was finally jumping ship full into Golarion after exactly 20 years of FR campaigning.
I came to Greyhawk late, and always felt there was secret history and knowledge others had that I didn’t to run it properly. I never let FR’s ‘lite’ rep bother me, I ran it gritty and hard. But even now the amount of material for it is overwhelming. I tried Kalamar and Midnight and Eberron also once each, and they were good, but not a comfy fit.
What makes Golarion so great to me is it’s reminds me most of my homebrew campaign world. I feel more comfortable with it and feel more creative freedom with Golarion than any other campaign. Even the local sourcebooks like Guide to Darkmoon Vale don’t feel crowded, like anything I’d want to fit in there would be a perfect fit.
-DM Jeff
ya know jeff i never though of runing the Rune lord in FR , I do have a few ideals now ya brought it up. I am running CotCT there now however
But you still have the grey box and it's still good. ;)
true enough
I would definitely say it is the newness factor of Golarion rather than any truly substantive or design comparison to FR. I picked up FR at the Grey Box version as well, and never looked back. I never felt Greyhawk was gritty or "realistic". I mean, one of the evil gods actually LIVES there, and none of the other surrounding countries have done anything about it? Greyhawk, to me, will always have that Monty Haul feel to it.
Forgotten Realms did lose some appeal over the years as the supplements grew and things were attempted to be fit in based on novels (Drizzt, Time of Troubles, etc), but again, you take what you want to use from it. It is not to be looked upon as dogma. There is no way to determine what will happen with Golarion in the long run. FR was out for MANY years before it was "corrupted", and they offered very good and useful supplements. I will always have fond memories of the Greenwood articles and how they were presented as if Elminster actually came and told him about the Realms. Truly awesome.
Until Pathfinder is actually released and people begin to write novels, supplements and all the other things that steered the flavor of FR, you cannot (and should not) compare the two as if one were better than the other. They are BOTH great products that have and will bring life and fun to your table.
I'll agree that FR suffers from trying to make the game setting match up to the game fiction, but why not try and make the fiction match the game instead? Paizo has done an outstanding job in the Journal articles of turning game mechanics into events in the fiction instead of turning fiction accounts into mechanics. For example, Eando Kline's attack of opportunity against the wounded elf (or half-elf) casting a spell while threatened in Korvosa.
Gonna disagree with you here. Now I like the fiction and all but it does not really line up with the game rules particularly well. For example Eando appears capable of leaping weaving and dodging his way through a pack of Red Mantis Assasins at one point but then flees from 5 Orcs at another and, later still, kills two Orcs with thrown knives in a split second.
Gonna disagree with you here. Now I like the fiction and all but it does not really line up with the game rules particularly well. For example Eando appears capable of leaping weaving and dodging his way through a pack of Red Mantis Assasins at one point but then flees from 5 Orcs at another and, later still, kills two Orcs with thrown knives in a split second.
I agree with that. Although I tnink that the authors aren't particularly trying to make whatever they write fit the game rules. Both in AP fiction and in the setting as a whole.
Bordering nation technologies don't bother me too much, because it's a 'moment in time' thing.
[..snip..]
Particularly true again if there's magic around, because some technological tasks can be achieved magically anyhow (indeed, magiclessnenss is the explanation for the most technologically advanced society in Golarion, right, which borders one where they have a lot of undead to do manual labour...).
Actually, I'd say Numeria is the most technologically advanced society in Golarion, kind-of-sort-of. So let's take that as an example. Either their super-technology is better than magic in some way (e.g. cheaper or easier or more powerful, in which case one of their bigger, more powerful neighbours could probably send a bunch of efreet/djinn/devils to come along and swipe it pretty easily), or their super-technology is pretty lame compared to magic (e.g. if it isn't cheaper or easier or more powerful than magic, then who cares about it?).
I guess it's one thing if the spaceship crashed a couple of years ago and the news hadn't spread around yet, but I thought the implication was that it had been that way for a while.
|
Gonna disagree with you here. Now I like the fiction and all but it does not really line up with the game rules particularly well. For example Eando appears capable of leaping weaving and dodging his way through a pack of Red Mantis Assasins at one point but then flees from 5 Orcs at another and, later still, kills two Orcs with thrown knives in a split second.
I'll agree that FR suffers from trying to make the game setting match up to the game fiction, but why not try and make the fiction match the game instead? Paizo has done an outstanding job in the Journal articles of turning game mechanics into events in the fiction instead of turning fiction accounts into mechanics. For example, Eando Kline's attack of opportunity against the wounded elf (or half-elf) casting a spell while threatened in Korvosa.
They have stated that they kept rules in mind when writing the stories. Wait until his stats are shown at the end of PF 18 before you say he can't do everything he's done. And about the Red mantis that he kills, only one is actually dressed as an full red mantis, the others might just be initiates - and he runs from the one in full dress.
|
HOLY SMOKE you nailed it on the noggin for me. THAT is EXACTLY why I never like FR.- Darker, and grittier. "Feels" more like DnD to me, in a lot of ways. Sometimes, FR feels a little too harry potterish to me.
Hmmmmm... I wouldn't call FR Harry Potterish. FR seems a bit more DC comics-ish to me. Heroes really are heroes and are respected. Heroes all have their own hometown stomping grounds. That sort of thing.
[snark] Oh, I thought you were going to say DC comics-ish in the way that the world keeps blowing up and reseting over and over....
[/snark]
Creative Director
|
Supertechnology that's the fruit of development can't just be swiped if you have no infrastructure of your own. Numeria's might be stealable but they could presumably defend it anyhow.
This.
Numera's got some crazy tech, but they themselves are not a technological society. They view the tech stolen from the crashed ship as magic and with an almost religious awe; they're MUCH more likely to worship a laser gun than try to take it apart and learn how it works.
As a general rule, the more south one goes on the map, the more high-fantasy things get and the stronger the technology gets. At Cheliax & Taldor's level, you've got printing presses and guillotines and huge saling ships (many of which have emigrated north to regions like Varisia and Ustalav). At Alkenstar, you've got guns and cannons (which are also emigrating north, although not as quickly).
I see Golarion as easy to GM and FR as too easy to GM. This is not an insult to either setting(maybe a little to FR).
When I started playing my group had three games run by one experienced GM and two not. Of the two not experienced GMs one ran FR and one ran Ravenloft( both 2ED). Though similarly skilled, only the FR GM ran a game that we played. Ravenloft required much more nuance than a new GM could pull off and both GM and players got frustrated and the game fell to the wayside. The 2ED FR gave us enough information to run a creative and involving game.
By the end of 3.0/3.5 FR had become so bloated with the minutia of every corner of Faerun. This led to hand-holding for new GMs leaving them in a position where they only create new dungeons and never mind the social stuff because that's spoon fed to you. Similarly, savvy GMs are restricted by a creative straight jacket wrapped around them by the minutia.
Golarion is great as a learners setting and a savvy GMs setting. It gives enough information to understand the basic attitudes, atmosphere, and culture of its countries, but leaves most of the interaction up to the GM. Additionally a new GM can start in a more traditional European setting and graduate to the more complex Gothic horror or Egyptian or Viking settings.
|
|
HOLY SMOKE you nailed it on the noggin for me. THAT is EXACTLY why I never like FR.- Darker, and grittier. "Feels" more like DnD to me, in a lot of ways. Sometimes, FR feels a little too harry potterish to me.
Hmmmmm... I wouldn't call FR Harry Potterish. FR seems a bit more DC comics-ish to me. Heroes really are heroes and are respected. Heroes all have their own hometown stomping grounds. That sort of thing.
I would go so far as to rank Harry Potter as darker than FR, even if there are some pretty fantastic elements in wizard society. That wizard society, nevertheless, has a lot of warts.
F%*~ Harry Potter.
|
|
Well, I did love the Realms. I bought the grey box when it came out 20 some years ago and never went anywhere else for a fantasy setting. Until now, after what they did to it in 4e.
Same as Merrik. Hi Buddy! [waves at Merrik, remembering the good old days of the Candlekeep forums, before it got polluted by sellout WotC brown-nosers]
|
|
By the end of 3.0/3.5 FR had become so bloated with the minutia of every corner of Faerun. This led to hand-holding for new GMs leaving them in a position where they only create new dungeons and never mind the social stuff because that's spoon fed to you. Similarly, savvy GMs are restricted by a creative straight jacket wrapped around them by the minutia.
I hate to agree with you, but I must... you hit the nail right on the head. However true this may be, though, I left the Realms because WotC decided it was *too* detailed and killed the setting, and not because it was *too* detailed (or bloated as you put it).
I can deal with the "bloating condition" easily by taking what I need and leaving the rest for later. However, I can't deal with "dead condition" WotC created, however...
|
|
I would definitely say it is the newness factor of Golarion rather than any truly substantive or design comparison to FR. I picked up FR at the Grey Box version as well, and never looked back. I never felt Greyhawk was gritty or "realistic". I mean, one of the evil gods actually LIVES there, and none of the other surrounding countries have done anything about it? Greyhawk, to me, will always have that Monty Haul feel to it.
Forgotten Realms did lose some appeal over the years as the supplements grew and things were attempted to be fit in based on novels (Drizzt, Time of Troubles, etc), but again, you take what you want to use from it. It is not to be looked upon as dogma. There is no way to determine what will happen with Golarion in the long run. FR was out for MANY years before it was "corrupted", and they offered very good and useful supplements. I will always have fond memories of the Greenwood articles and how they were presented as if Elminster actually came and told him about the Realms. Truly awesome.
Until Pathfinder is actually released and people begin to write novels, supplements and all the other things that steered the flavor of FR, you cannot (and should not) compare the two as if one were better than the other. They are BOTH great products that have and will bring life and fun to your table.
Exactly.
I've read through all of these posts, and I was wondering if anybody was going to point out the fact that when Realms started out as a Grey Box (after some articles in DRAGON), it wasn't super detailed. It was bare bones, without a lot of information. It was up to the DM to fill in the blanks.
As time went on, more and more areas got developed, rewritten, fleshed out, and detailed. More novels were written, DRAGON articles were printed, and DUNGEON adventures came out. More people got their fingers in the rice bowl. Contradictions occured, and some areas became popular, while others were almost completely ignored. Some people enjoyed the detail, some didn't, and some didn't care.
Give it time. Like Forgotten Realms, like Greyhawk, like Dragonlance, like Spelljammer, like Darksun, like Planescape, Pathfinder will be fleshed out. Details will be revealed, adventures written, novels composed (I'd imagine), and maybe even computer games programmed.
Five to ten years from now, a new world will come out, and everybody will gripe about how much better it is than Golarion, how much less stiffling the environment is, how open and expansive, and NEW it is.
I, for one, will always like Forgotten Realms. It was my first world, and it will be my last. I do like Pathfinder. The product support is fantastic, and some of the region ideas are fresh and inviting. But, where's Undermountain? Where's Selune's Tears? Where's Zhentil Keep, and Thay, and Halruaa? They'll show up, in some fashion, I'm sure, but for me, they'll never have the same meaning as the original. Toril was a great world before 4E, and hopefully will soon be one day again.
Pathfinder is great, but it will tarnish and loose it's luster, but hopefully not for a long time. Twenty years in the mark to beat, Paizo. Let's see if you are up to it.
...I've been following the Pathfinder world for a while and have utilized some scenarios, both Adventure Path and the Adventure booklets, on the website I have read summaries and excerpts of other products, etc.-
However, could someone please explain why Pathfinder is "better" than Eberron? I'm still not hearing anything compelling other than its somewhat darker, it has everything under the sun, it's more logically consistent than the Forgotten Realms.
But What's the unique "catch" of the world, as in why it is unique and why should I care about Golarion rather than my homebrew creation?
I want to care about Golarion and its lore, but I find it difficult to do currently.
It seems a lot like a grittier Greyhawk, as far as I can make out.
I can appreciate Greyhawk's lore, the Maure Castle series, the trials and tribulations of Bigby, Riggby, et al. and the Age of Worms, Shackled City and the adventure to adventure interplay of the historic figures.
Similarly, although I've always seen FR as a bit ridiculous with its power-structures- contained areas of FR seem to run relatively smoothly- eg. Icewind Dale, the Sword Coast, Baldur's gate area and series. As opposed to the odd interplay between Harpers and Sszas Taim and bizarre things dealing with the Zhentarim, etc. FR has its lore... It's not as integrated or logically consistent as the other worlds, but certain parts are more logical than others.
Dragonlance 3rd age- classic Dragonlance I believe, was similarly interesting thanks to its books, although the setting was somewhat weak beyond that.
Eberron is a great setting. Vastly underpopulated though, especially for a place that's supposed to be relatively advanced magically- I somehow can't believe the great war could depopulate countries such as the one in which Sharn is located by such vast amounts that this country that is about 1/2 the size of the US (I may misrecall the numbers- but isn't it about 1700 km by 800 km across? And 1700 km is roughly the distance of Houston to New York City?) And yet the population is what... 13-15 Million? Allegedly there were more American indians in the country when columbus landed in 1492. ... ... ... And with magic banishing disease, one would think that there would be at least twice as many people- how heavenly barren must the countryside be- especially since sharn has nearly 1 Million people alone!
That being said, eberron has an integrated feel.
--
What does Golarion have going for it? I'd like to purchase its campaign setting, and likely will (I currently possess: Eberron, Dragonlance, FR, etc.) But I really don't understand the excitement that appears to be held by some posters here. I don't see things being all 'put together'
--
I suppose it does not help that I do not appreciate the "Dark" feel of the adventure paths. I liked the feel of the AGe of Worms, Castle Maure, Savage Tide. I did not like the feel of Cauldron, or the Pathfinder AP's first few episodes. It seems Paizo is attempting to follow WOTC (and perhaps the majority of fans' interest in this- I do NOT claim to be an ordinary fan) in pursuing a "points of light" campaign setting.
I've always thought that the far more challenging setting would be to create a challenging and detailed world that isn't all emo-World of Darkness-ish. It does not have to be a childishly fluffy nothing bad happens here place to be challenging. Eberron appears to pull this off relatively well- since Eberron is about exploration and discovery and promise and hope.
- The World of Darkness, Midnight, Ravenloft are about loss and tragedy. (Old World of Darkness is the only one of these I willingly play, and then only because I enjoy its roleplaying system- I play Mage... not vampire, not werewolf- because mage is about possibilities and creation.)
- Dark Sun, and Greyhawk appears to be about death and grittiness. (I can appreciate Greyhawk, but would never play in either of these worlds- they're too sad to be fun.)
- Exalted, and Eberron appear to be about hope and exploration and discovery and promise (These settings are amazing.)
- Planescape fits somewhere in here (Fascinating setting, but I wasn't too impressed by the 2nd ed sourcebooks on it. I liked the Manual of the Planes for 3rd ed, however.)
- Mystara is... forgettable.
- Forgotten Realms appears to be about high fantasy and adventure and heroics.
- Spelljammer is... odd.
On this continuum... - Where is Golarion?
|
|
However, could someone please explain why Pathfinder is "better" than Eberron? I'm still not hearing anything compelling other than its somewhat darker, it has everything under the sun, it's more logically consistent than the Forgotten Realms.
I don't think it is, really. Eberron is one of the best designed game worlds for D&D, ever*, and it serves a different niche than Golarion does, IMO. Depending on the game I want to run, Eberron might even prove superior, although I suspect that I could move any Eberron story I wanted to run into Golarion without too much struggle (Mwangi Expanse becomes Xendrik, the Gebbite nations replaces the Karrnathi, the Mana Wastes or Worldwound area take on a Mournlands vibe, a Scarn Inquisitives game becomes set in Korvosa or Absolom, etc).
I don't think it's 'better' in every sense than Greyhawk or the Realms, either. Golarion combines the best elements of both, IMO, and makes something that's got some hybrid vigor, as a result. But if I wanted something that felt *more* like Greyhawk or the Realms, I'd use Greyhawk or the Realms, and not Golarion.
Same with Eberron, or the Scarred Lands, or Kalamar, or any of the other amazingly cool settings floating around out there.
Just because I can drop Al-Qadim flavor into Qadira or Osirion or whatever, doesn't mean I can't find Zakhara even better suited to the game me and my players are hankering for. Golarion gives me that option, 'though, and I like that.
*I'm particularly impressed with how Keith Baker seemed to really, really think about the affects of other races and specific PHB spells on the cultures he'd created. Whole merchant houses built on specific spells, for instance. It really felt like the first D&D setting designed to *account for* the effects of the abilities present in the game, rather than handwave them away. Less 'pseudo-Europe, with magic added on as an afterthought' and more 'a world that has always been magical, with all the change that implies.'
Isn't Eberron the world that was ruled by giants who enslaved Elves? I was pretty stubborn about my transition from AD&D and never experienced the world even after converting.
That's the one, but thwas a long time ago and the world is currently the one with magical robots and psionic nightmare-worms from another dimension.
I don't think it is, really. Eberron is one of the best designed game worlds for D&D, ever*
True. Not my flavour of fantasy rpg, but the execution is exceptionally well done.
|
|
French Vanilla but with Chocolate Sauce...
I like my evil to be truly evil and with Pathfinder I get that. Many have said it is grittier (some have complained about Pathfinder 3 being too gritty - not me by the way) and I love it grittier.
When I kill an evil guy I want to know that I have truly done something noble. For James and company - please continue to give me my evil in a clearly evil way and the grittier the better.
A GM can easily take Golarion and put an emphasis on any one genre he prefers. Classic fantasy, Vikings, Egyptians, Devil Worshippers, Empires, Revolutionary lands, Demon infested lands... Pick what you want to play and there is a place for it.To me, that seems not to be a good thing. In a setting, I want many variations of one theme. But a collection of many themes just kills for me the experience of really getting into it. It's just not a cool norse viking world, when it's two weeks by ship to get to the cool steampunk gnome land.
Chose one theme for the whole setting and make all the regions different approaches and variations of the theme. That's what I belive makes a really good setting. If you want to play with another basic theme, use another setting. Trying to please everyone only leads to pleasing noone.
Earth/Terra/Meatspace has no single theme. Why should a plausible campaign setting?
French Vanilla but with Chocolate Sauce...
I like my evil to be truly evil and with Pathfinder I get that. Many have said it is grittier (some have complained about Pathfinder 3 being too gritty - not me by the way) and I love it grittier.
I found Pathfinder 3 hilarious, unlike Pathfinder 2. By the time I got to the ogre poet, overabundance of gory details stopped being anything but funny.
|
|
I'll be honest, I find the sheer disparity in Golarion a setback to the setting. I find elements of the campaign world engaging and interesting, but the last thing I want to shatter my suspended disbelief is a player showing up saying "I am a revolutionary from Galt! Viva le resistance!". It gives a campaign options, but it doesn't give the world a unifying feel.
For ten years, we played in the Forgotten Realms, mostly in the Mulhorand and Thay area, and we had a sense of culture -- they fought Sinbad-esque monsters, avoided undead mummies, fought evil wizards, and were crushed by big bronze golems. Fun was had. However, the players brought in other elements from other areas of the world ("can I play a Shou Expatriate?", "can I play a star elf?", "can I have a cohort from Impiltur?". They travelled to different areas, and enjoyed the different cultures out there, but they weren't jarring to their core culture and campaign expectations.
I guess what I'm saying is yes, if you want a Linnorm campaign you could, but just over the horizon are rayguns and guillotines. Maybe it bothers me more than most, but I find that jarring to my sensibilities as the Campaign World Manager.
Now that being said, I have revived my homebrew campaign from the AD&D days, and I find Golarion supplements easily used to inspire and flesh out my world. I *really* appreciate the PDF versions of the publications, because I can cut and paste bits I like into my campaign booklet I hand the characters. I've taken bits of spells, gods, magic items, culture, prestige classes, history, and other flavour text and made it my own, which I deeply appreciate and makes me a customer of all things Golarion ...
I'll be honest, I find the sheer disparity in Golarion a setback to the setting. I find elements of the campaign world engaging and interesting, but the last thing I want to shatter my suspended disbelief is a player showing up saying "I am a revolutionary from Galt! Viva le resistance!". It gives a campaign options, but it doesn't give the world a unifying feel.
That's exactly my point.
I guess what I'm saying is yes, if you want a Linnorm campaign you could, but just over the horizon are rayguns and guillotines. Maybe it bothers me more than most, but I find that jarring to my sensibilities as the Campaign World Manager.
Rayguns and guillotines are nothing (relatively). Spellcasters and outsiders that are literally one spell/SLA away from your viking lands (and totally can exterminate your vikings the moment they try to behave like actual vikings) are the much bigger problem. Isolated pockets of a specific theme/feel/genre can fly in a world like Rafenloft, but not in a world that is effectively globalized by magic, at least as far as people who matter are concerned. FR tried to solve this problem by making every area on the map chock-full with uber-epic characters, that do not welcome competitors from the other parts of the world. Golarion don't seem to even try to solve it. That's why I might borrow some of its elements for my games (I like Lamashtu, Tassilon and everything related to it, Golarion gnolls, ogres and rakshasas, and that's about all), but I'll never going to DM or play it.
I have not really read a lot of the Golarian setting having stumbled upon Paizo quite by accident (fortuitous accident!), but it seems to me that the world has a disparity because it is not all created by the same developer. Is this the case? I am only relatively familiar with the Darkmoon Vale area, which seems to have been fleshed out mostly by the adventures that have taken place there, then solidified in the Guide to Darkmoon Vale product.
Anyway, in Golarian and Forgotten Realms both, you can quite conceivably play a campaign dedictated entirely to one area. The players don't HAVE to be world shaking heroes in order to be (and feel like) heroes after all. I like to pick one area and flesh it out, getting the players so involved in it that when they travel, the new land takes on the illusion of actually being foreign to them. I will never forget my campaign based near Waterdeep to start, and after a while the adventurers needed to go to Cormyr. The looks on their faces when a guard patrol asked them for their adventuring license was priceless. Ahh, good times. My current campaign is being set exclusively in the Darkmoon Vale region, but may expand beyond that depending on what the players drive is. I like the whole Cheliax city-state demon thing, so may expand there. But I don't need to "know" the whole world in order to enjoy a piece of it. I will most certainly steer clear of any futuristic ideas.
3. maturity level. The AP and Module content in particular bespeaks a very gritty world. Goblins arent generically evil chumps or misunderstood underdogs; they're nasty little baby-eating freaks. The list goes on.
I'm... not entirely sure how portraying the evil races as universally (if sometimes hilariously) psychotic bespeaks a higher maturity level.
It does at least give justification for the old-school tact of slaughtering an entire tribe without remorse, which is good, in a way, because in a lot of the older modules, "Because it says Evil in their alignment" was all the reason you needed. At least now you know why you're doing it other than just feeling like it's an Us vs. Them thing.
Maybe I'm just a fan of the idea of D&D goblins as underdogs, though. Survivors in a post apocalyptic world full of longshanked mutants out to get them. (Mad Gogmurt, Beyond the Hobbit-Dome.")
This is not to say I don't like the Golarion Goblins. Believe me, I do. They're a clever, crazy, little re-imagining that gives them a heck of a lot more personality going for them than what most D&Desque Fantasy games bother to give. (I keep thinking of Kobolds Ate My Baby!)
But I tend to view maturity as an exploration of motivations, the discovery that matters are more often more complex than they appear, and less black and white. What's attractive, and... darker about a lot of old pulp novels in comparison to a lot of the newer stuff are the moral gray areas the characters move through, either in their own actions or the world with which they struggle... or the discovery that bleakness and depravity can't be isolated amongst 'Dem bad dudes on the other side of the track.'
Now, I'd say the folks behind Golarion are darn good at portraying that depth overall, and that's because of the likes of Curse of the Crimson Throne, Hangman's Noose, and even Second Darkness or Crown of the Kobold King.
Adventure Spoilers below:
That a greater cruelty lurks in the heart of a human queen than any tribe of goblins, that the croaking spectre of the old court-house hates and hunts with good reason even if grossly without conscience in method and direction, that an elven nation maintains an eons wide cover-up as much to protect the pure reputation of their race as anything else (I could use some more strife based there, though,) that the real enemy in a tribe of kobolds is the corrupt and partially insane leadership who believe human sacrifice is the only way to save their community...
... that's the kind of depth/darkness I can expect from the story-writers at Paizo, and why I recomend Golarion overall, even if I do have my personal issues with their overall presentation of the Evil Races.
... I apologize if this turned into a rant. Mostly, I guess it can be summed up that I collect Pathfinder stuff for the good writing.
But I tend to view maturity as an exploration of motivations, the discovery that matters are more often more complex than they appear, and less black and white.
To play a devil's advocate, complexity does not necessarily mean redeeming traits. Also, roleplaying games disagree. "Maturity" usually means that instead of black and white you have grey and black %). (Or black and soul-sucking light-devouring void (c).)
What's attractive, and... darker about a lot of old pulp novels in comparison to a lot of the newer stuff are the moral gray areas the characters move through, either in their own actions or the world with which they struggle... or the discovery that bleakness and depravity can't be isolated amongst 'Dem bad dudes on the other side of the track.'
You know, this description is entirely applicable to "Dragons of..." Krynn novels, just to pick example straight from DnD. Also, I clearly remember, that, say, Conan stories, if we talk about pulp were not short on totally evil villains and utterly alien monsters in need of killing.
Respectfully, I completely disagree.
Choosing one theme and then building everything around it is a great way to build a CAMPAIGN.
It is not a great way to build a setting, particularly not a setting that is intended to appeal to a large number of people.
I agree and disagree with you. I believe there is enough room in the world for both types of campaign settings: a general campaign setting and a specific campaign setting. General campaign settings like Pathfinder, Greyhawk, FR, 3rd Imperium, Exalted, the World of Darkness, and many others definitely outlast specific campaign settings because they can handle many different types of campaigns and allow for the players to switch from capaign to campain without relearning the entire world.
But I have yet to see any general campaign setting tackle niches of specific campaign settings better. Examples: Promethean, Third Dawn, Call of Cthulu, Ravenloft. While all campaign settings can do these, sometimes you have to completely change settings to accomplish what is desired.
For example, (and this is not a knock on Pathfinder at all, just an example) if you wanted to do a rebellion game where the players are former slaves by a race other then human, set it on the material plane so the basicks are familiar to players, and give them a sense of no hope, where are you going to set it? My first thought is the Hold of Balkzen. But does that really deliver the "sense of no hope" that you're really after? I mean all the players have to do is escape and make it over the border and they're free. They can always cling to that hope, thus defeating one of the main points of the game. But if you went with a setting where hobgoblins were the dominant race and there simply were no major human kingdoms around, then where's an escape player suppose to go? To the legendary free human city somewhere in the mountains, protected by ancient mystical powers the hobgoblins have never been able to defeat or even detect? They can hold out hope for that until they discover the city has been sacked. Then where do they go? They make their own kingdom.
I don't really see that game easily possible in Pathfinder. Sure if you take the players to other planes or other planets, yea that can be done. But Paizo isn't going to give that region as much support as even a PDF company is going to give their campaign setting built around one specific concept. Paizo is going to focus on places that easily reusable (Falcon's Hollow, Sandpoint, Absalom, and others). Which CS will last longer, Pathfinder's, easily.
|
|
Supertechnology that's the fruit of development can't just be swiped if you have no infrastructure of your own. Numeria's might be stealable but they could presumably defend it anyhow.This.
Numera's got some crazy tech, but they themselves are not a technological society. They view the tech stolen from the crashed ship as magic and with an almost religious awe; they're MUCH more likely to worship a laser gun than try to take it apart and learn how it works.
As a general rule, the more south one goes on the map, the more high-fantasy things get and the stronger the technology gets. At Cheliax & Taldor's level, you've got printing presses and guillotines and huge saling ships (many of which have emigrated north to regions like Varisia and Ustalav). At Alkenstar, you've got guns and cannons (which are also emigrating north, although not as quickly).
HA! You've admitted there's canons! NO TAKEBACKS! =p
one of the few drawbacks of the setting is guns and cannons
|
|
For example, (and this is not a knock on Pathfinder at all, just an example) if you wanted to do a rebellion game where the players are former slaves by a race other then human, set it on the material plane so the basicks are familiar to players, and give them a sense of no hope, where are you going to set it? My first thought is the Hold of Balkzen. But does that really deliver the "sense of no hope" that you're really after? I mean all the players have to do is escape and make it over the border and they're free. They can always cling to that hope, thus defeating one of the main points of the game. But if you went with a setting where hobgoblins were the dominant race and there simply were no major human kingdoms around, then where's an escape player suppose to go? To the legendary free human city somewhere in the mountains, protected by ancient mystical powers the hobgoblins have never been able to defeat or even detect? They can hold out...
FWIW if I were going for a sense of no hope, I'd go for the Darklands. So your a slave owned by a Drow great house. To get out you'd need to escape the family, flee the metropolis of Zirnakaynin, dodge all the Drow, Morlocks, Ghouls etc in Sekamina to get up to Nar-Voth, and find a route up to the surface without being captured and enslaved again by the Duergar, experimented on by the Derro, or killed by the Trogs, not to mention that a lot of the routes up are pretty damn dangerous in themselves.
I totally agree that a setting where a monstrous race has taken over would be the ideal place for that kind of campaign, and would probably be what I'd use. But I'd say that when you're lost in Sekamina without a map, then all the human societies on Golarion might as well be a possibly-mythical free city behind a magical barrier.
As far as Golarion goes, I think I mostly love it because it's the first traditional setting that I've been able to get in on pretty much the ground floor. I feel confident that my knowledge of the world is about as complete as it can possibly be short of sitting down and memorising every word of every book, and that's a nice feeling. Whether it's better than FR et al, I agree with those that have been saying that we can't judge that yet, we really need a few years for Golarion to mature. One thing that does stand out though, is that I don't think I've read any setting book that compares to Pathfinder Chronicles in terms of focus on inspiring GMs to come up with their own plotlines based on the lore already in place. The sheer quantity of clever plothooks seeded through some of the books, both blatant and subtle (from obvious big-bad-over-there, to open-ended little mysteries and unusual bits of flavour that spark the imagination), is absolutely dizzying.
I recently stumbled over this old post by Erik Mona on the wizards boards, and couldn't help thinking this analysis of/insight to Greyhawk's true appeal was later applied to Golarion.
I strongly agree with the previous poster, who suggested that a "new" official Greyhawk presentation must play to the setting's strengths. But unlike some have suggested here, I don't believe that "history" is such a strength.*
Don't get me wrong. Greyhawk's enduring and fairly complex history is incredibly important, but I've come to believe that it is more important to hard-core fans (like those of us who regularly post here or at Canonfire) and designers (who after all, ought to remain consistent) than it is to the general D&D enthusiast.
And make no mistake. An official "relaunch" of the setting _must_ appeal to the general D&D fan with no preconceived notions of what Greyhawk means in order to be financially viable, even if published by a small company under some sort of official license. If a relaunch is not financially viable, we'll get yet another aborted era for the setting that will further divide Greyhawk's fractuous fans.
I've come to believe that the true "hook" for the campaign setting is "Adventures in the classic Sword & Sorcery Style." Let Eberron and its fans chase the latest "kewl" innovation. Leave the flying surfboards and trains and warforged to a setting that was meant to accommodate them from the ground up. Adding a mish-mash of "new fantasy" ideas to Greyhawk is like putting the proverbial lipstick on a pig.
But the thing is, plenty of D&D fans, and certainly plenty of fantasy readers in general, enjoy the taste of bacon. That's our base, and I think the further you go from that the more you're asking for commercial trouble. To succeed financially, Greyhawk must offer something that other settings do not. Eberron has "new fantasy" locked up for the foreseeable future. The Forgotten Realms is the place for deep historical pornography and NPC family trees. Classic Sword & Sorcery has been all but abandoned at an official level.
This isn't to say that Greyhawk's designers should shun new ideas. Each time Howard, Vance, or Leiber put pen to paper, they came up with something new (or at least tried to). But they did so (generally) within the conventions they'd established for previous tales set in their own fantasy universes.
The existing body of Greyhawk material, "canon," as it is so often called, defines in general terms the conventions that ought to be used to craft future releases in this mythical Greyhawk relaunch. When Gary Gygax crafted Greyhawk, he did so by drawing upon the conventions of the prevalent fantasy of his era, which is to say the "Adult Fantasy" being released by editor Lin Carter and others of his ilk. Check the reading list in the back of the first edition Dungeon Master's Guide. Many (if not most) of the tales therein seem to have a "Greyhawk" flair to them. Imaginative, with a touch of darkness. You're more likely to run into a demon than a faerie or unicorn, but the style is open enough to include all of the above.
Most of this fiction is plot-driven, rather than character-driven fantasy (in the vein of, say, the Dragonlance Chronicles). Greyhawk should not run away from this, but should rather embrace it. The focus should be on what the characters are doing, not who they are. Filling in the personal details is the responsibility of the players, and one of the things that makes D&D such a joy to play.
That brings us to adventures. Sourcebooks can be entertaining, but they're much better when they provide things for players to do than when they're just prattling on about the history of this or that nation.
I'm glad that we did the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer the way we did. Fred, Gary, Sean, and I were in the right place at the right time to pull together all of the various Greyhawk threads from a million out-of-print sources, writing a historical and political blueprint for the setting that fit (nearly) perfectly with some 30 years of products, magazine articles, novels, and adventures. Having glimpsed inside the sausage factory, so to speak, I think it's fair to say that no other authors positioned to write the book at that time would have had the interest (obsession?) to do it that way, and Greyhawk is better off for having a coherent, consistent history.
But that book has been done.
Any new treatment of Greyhawk as a setting, I believe, must focus on the role of the character within the setting. Greyhawk is a world of adventure, with crumbling ruins, forlorn cairns, and fading lands in every corner of the countryside. It is a land that accurately models the rules of the D&D game. By always seeking the next danger, exploring the next blighted castle, or venturing across the distant horizon, it's possible to move from humble beginnings to the height of temporal and political power.
Greyhawk is the setting of adventure in the classic Sword & Sorcery style. Adult Fantasy, to borrow the term.
Which brings us to the Underdark, and GVDammerung's original post. The Underdark is a classic element of Greyhawk's past, and one we definitely shouldn't run away from. But it has been largely appropriated by the Forgotten Realms, and is perhaps an inappropriate focus for a rebirth of the campaign setting in general. I can see a fairly large hardcover product focused on Oerik's Underdark (I strongly dislike the clunky term "UnderOerth"), with notes on culture, maps of important cave networks, details on drow vaults and derro Uniting Wars, and most importantly a boatload of adventure hooks and perhaps even campaign outlines. An all-purpose Underdark campaign setting that just happens to fit beneath the world we already know and love.
But, in my view, it should be only one such book. Another might focus on city adventuring, with plenty of ready-made examples and lots of beautiful maps, with each city representing a different campaign theme. Another book might focus on the Amedio and the ruins of the Olman Empire. Perhaps another might present everything you need to run a Greyhawk-themed political campaign, maybe set in Keoland. Another might feature the crumbling Great Kingdom and the madmen who would seek to rekindle its dark fire. Perhaps another on the Thillonrian. Almost certainly something on the City of Greyhawk and the Sea of Dust.
The question is "what sort of campaign do you want to play?"
Whatever your answer, at least within the realm of classic Sword & Sorcery, a resurgent Greyhawk setting ought to have a hardcover product to match your needs.
--Erik Mona
* I must say, however, that there is some personal appeal to a treatment that would allow players to "pick their era," so to speak. Why should the time of the Suel Empire, the Great Migrations, or even the Greyhawk Wars be off limits to players following contemporary Greyhawk releases? One intriguing possibility would be to establish a handful of campaign "themes," and slave a specific time period of Greyhawk's past to that theme. The best part about this idea would be that a book on, say, the Great Migrations era would be usable as deep historical reference and inspiration to almost all "factions" of the existing fandom. Sure, you might be running a campaign in 576 and I in 585, but both of us might be able to use ancient legacy weaponry, cultural customs, or tombs of figures from the most important event in the development of the Flanaess. It may end up being more trouble than it's worth, but it's a topic worthy of discussion.
Wow, Erik made ME want to relive Greyhawk! lol
Good persuasive writing. He should get a job in gaming. ;)
Nice digging to find that post. I can certainly see where some of those elements have come into play for Golarion.
To play a devil's advocate, complexity does not necessarily mean redeeming traits. Also, roleplaying games disagree. "Maturity" usually means that instead of black and white you have grey and black %). (Or black and soul-sucking light-devouring void (c).)You know, this description is entirely applicable to "Dragons of..." Krynn novels, just to pick example straight from DnD. Also, I clearly remember, that, say, Conan stories, if we talk about pulp were not short on totally evil villains and utterly alien monsters in need of killing.
I know I remember enjoying the "Dragons of..." for a reason.
Well, that's true. But villains are individuals, which is part of what I'm trying to say. They're individuals who've become enamored with cruelty or whose methods/goals overstep serious bounds, not races who collectively wear the Evil Hats so Good-aligned heroes are always morally justified in killing them. And to be fair, the idea of dozens of races who wear the Evil Hat is a problem I have with D&D in general, not with Paizo. Paizo at least, has leant more context to the evil of the Evil Races than they usually get in D&D.
Conan had plenty of large groups of people he battled on a regular basis, berserkers from the warlike Asgard, etc... but Conan was never implied to be good aligned. Part of the moral grayness of his stories comes from the fact that both Conan and his foes often live in a harsh world where fighting life or death battles is necessary to survive, or to thrive, or stave off the boredom inherent in their perspective of civilization. To be fair, a lot of the older older D&D stuff, such as Keep on the Borderlands has inspiration from this kind of world, where the fight is on for both sides just to survive, or where raiding opposing towns and dungeons is more fun for adventurers and hobgoblin warriors alike than earning a living by opening a tavern.
As for utterly alien monsters... perhaps rightly, perhaps not, I tend to give them a pass because... that's part of the point. They're so alien, they're devoid of even a reference point to our moral compass. But then, we get into the soul-sucking light-devouring void thing (which, to my opinion, is horror at its most unsettling.)
