Here is an interesting article that was posted a while back called Putting the Grey in the Hawk. It talks about what makes Greyhawk work and how it is different from the Realms. Hopefully it helps to clarify the differences. It worked very well for me back in the day!
And yet is mostly untrue. Ouch. The Greyhawk bias was painful.
Here are the differences between the two:
- They're pretty much the same, except that:
1) FR has more detail for harried and busy DMs, and
2) FR has more cruddy novels written by incompetents.
Sorry Lisa - you're hurting more than helping.
UAt work and at lunch, so here's a bit on why I hate fr so much.
Part of it is the overpowered npcs. Whether it is in game or in novel (although things changed drastically around the time of the year of rogue dragons trilogy), you really had to wonder how evil was still in the works with el, drizzt and the rest of the superfriends still running about. It would be different if there was the occasional casualty, but a lot of the heroes, if not all of them are still alive and active in the world. You could say the same thing for the villains too, who rarely seem to die permanently -in many ways the world is like a golden age comic book that way.
Another source of hate are the fans. While yes, every setting had it's adherents, fr fans are second only to planescape fans in their foaming at the mouth fanaticism. I've had the dubious opportunity to play in the the world with a true fan as the DM and it was little more than a tour of famous realms hotspots with npcs as window dressing. When I complained, the guy readily gave up the DM seat, which was good, but the group made it clear that they would not play anywhere other than the realms, which was another source of frustration.
Yet another problem I had were the kits.. After a while and with several dms, it became quite obvious that pc classes were actually for npcs, and that kits were the new classes. One game I was in had a guy who would regularly kill off his character to play a new kit from the latest supplement with the blessing of the DM -not a problem really, but something I noticed that was unique to the setting.
Perhaps the biggest problem I had with the setting was that it killed any other settings not directly attached to it. Fr fans attribute this to sour grapes, but it was hard finding fans of other settings offline after a while. Fr just got more money,, which meant more writers and more products. Sometimes this lead to amazing things like baldurs gate for pc, other times it lead to strange looks as fellow, gamers wondered where athas was on the map of toril.
As work interrupted me several times at lunch, my thought process was obviously derailed a bit, but that's my problem with fr in a nutshell. To me, it is less of a campaign setting and more of a parody of one.
See having read so many FR novels I actually became less inclined to play or run a game in the realms. Thats because there were just too damn many epic good guys, any game accomplishment felt hollow because you knew if you failed Elminster or Drizzt or Blackstaff Arunson or etc... would just clean it up before it got too bad. However in Greyhawk Tensor and Bigby were killed (2 of the big good guys) and the epic level near godhood wizard was Mordenkainen and it's hard to predict what he would do since he is true neutral. In the past Mordenkainen has helped the side of evil as much as good. So if your heroes stopped a big bad evil thing from happening it just felt better. Mainly because had you not done it chances are no one else would have.
My detailed take on the Greyhawk setting.
My detailed take on the Forgotten Realms setting.
Boiling it down, GREYHAWK is a (relatively) lightly-detailed, low-to-mid-level setting with a fairly restrained number of races and types of magic. Even the most powerful NPCs in the setting - Tensor, Bigby etc - tend to fall into the Level 15-20 range, which was fairly modest even during the days of 1st Edition.
FORGOTTEN REALMS is a highly-detailed, mid-to-high-level setting with an enormous number of races and different forms of magic. The most powerful NPCs in the setting can go toe-to-toe with gods and survive.
The reason for the difference is that Gygax left TSR in the mid-1980s and took GREYHAWK with him, preventing TSR from using it aside from brief periods when they had his permission*. This prevented the 'feature creep' that overtook FORGOTTEN REALMS, but it also prevented the setting from becoming anywhere near as popular. FORGOTTEN REALMS has been continuously in print for just over 25 years (the setting celebrated its quarter-century-anniversary just last month), but GREYHAWK has probably been in print for only about 7-8 years out of its 30 years in existence. The setting simply never had the time to grow into the hugely detailed setting that FR became.
* ETA: This might not actually be right. IIRC, TSR did retain ownership of the setting but voluntarily chose to work on other settings so as not to clash with Gygax's vision, something that obviously went out the window when they developed 'From the Ashes'.
I, personally, don't see the "Greyhawk:Forgotten Realms :: 1e:2e" analogy. Forgotten Realms WAS around in the days of 1e. The first version of the campaign set was published in 1987.
Ed Greenwood published his first material set in the FORGOTTEN REALMS in a DRAGON article published in 1978, only a couple of years after the first modules and articles published by Gygax about GREYHAWK appeared. Both settings existed for as long as 1E did (or in GREYHAWK's case even longer).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another source of hate are the fans. While yes, every setting had it's adherents, fr fans are second only to planescape fans in their foaming at the mouth fanaticism.
Interesting, I ultimately went for the Realms because I was tired of Greyhawk's fandom fanatism ;) Even these days when you ask someone why they prefer Greyhawk to FR, the answer is often "because FR is for losers/beginners/kids/power-players/munchkins/monthy-hauler/Drizzt wannabes" etc :(
I do agree with the novels/fiction thing however. Also, I do agree that at one time, FR was exploding in 10000 directions simultaneously (and not necessarily cohesively). 3e did a good job of consolidating most of it (or at least made a honorable attempt), but it does have a kitchen sink feel. As for kits, this was more a 2e AD&D thing than a FR thing IMO. As far as I know, only two FR supplements had kits (one for fighters and priests and one for wizards and rogues), but I might be wrong.
Early Greyhawk had a much more medieval/feudal feel than most modern settings however; something I miss a lot...
'findel
Even the most powerful NPCs in the setting - Tensor, Bigby etc - tend to fall into the Level 15-20 range, which was fairly modest even during the days of 1st Edition.
Maybe for your games -- in ours, 10-14 (the level range cited as appropriate for the infamous Tomb of Horrors) was considered high level, and almost all PCs who lived that long retired from adventuring soon after reaching "name" level and establishing a stronghold. Then again, given the slow rate of progression, it often took several years of intense gaming to get any character to that level -- and most of them died at low level anyway.
Part of it is the overpowered npcs. Whether it is in game or in novel (although things changed drastically around the time of the year of rogue dragons trilogy), you really had to wonder how evil was still in the works with el, drizzt and the rest of the superfriends still running about. It would be different if there was the occasional casualty, but a lot of the heroes, if not all of them are still alive and active in the world. You could say the same thing for the villains too, who rarely seem to die permanently -in many ways the world is like a golden age comic book that way.
Yeah, the problem with books. This is the result of abundance of poorly written books and enforcement of TSR code of ethics - good must triumph over evil, evil cannot be portrayed in any appealing fashion, etc.
BTW: Note that keeping the same evil guys is what was put as a positive example in the article posted by Lisa under "persistent personified evil" - the author of that text thought that repeated use of the same evil NPCs is a good thing. When it comes to good book NPCs (Drizzit for example) this is the problem of not killing the golden-egg laying goose that prevented writers of keeping more of them dead.
I admit that I immunized myself that that in a very simple way - I am not treating any of the books for Forgotten Realms seriously, nor for most expanded universes as well. If I would do otherwise I would have to hate Star Wars as it shares with FR the problem of too many bad books being written.
How often GMs you played with actually used those NPCs? Myself I have never used them (I intend to use Khelben and his wife a bit when I finally manage to start Waterdhavian campaign, but it does not seem to be soon, but it will be the first such case in my games) and I don't recall anyone actually introducing such NPCs in games I played in.
Another source of hate are the fans. While yes, every setting had it's adherents, fr fans are second only to planescape fans in their foaming at the mouth fanaticism. I've had the dubious opportunity to play in the the world with a true fan as the DM and it was little more than a tour of famous realms hotspots with npcs as window dressing. When I complained, the guy readily gave up the DM seat, which was good, but the group made it clear that they would not play anywhere other than the realms, which was another source of frustration.
I understand principles lying behind this reason - fanatic fans soured me towards the old World Of Darkness. I didn't meet FR fanatics personally, however. And on the net I only found people mostly defending FR against attacks.
Yet another problem I had were the kits.. After a while and with several dms, it became quite obvious that pc classes were actually for npcs, and that kits were the new classes. One game I was in had a guy who would regularly kill off his character to play a new kit from the latest supplement with the blessing of the DM -not a problem really, but something I noticed that was unique to the setting.
This is not unique to FR - I have noticed similar problems completely unrelated to FR, players getting quickly borred of their current characters and wanting to try something new NOW. Especially when there are books with new options (3.5 splatbook bloat, I am looking at you, ah, and old WoD creeps books... you are on the list too).
Perhaps the biggest problem I had with the setting was that it killed any other settings not directly attached to it. Fr fans attribute this to sour grapes, but it was hard finding fans of other settings offline after a while. Fr just got more money,, which meant more writers and more products. Sometimes this lead to amazing things like baldurs gate for pc, other times it lead to strange looks as fellow, gamers wondered where athas was...
Duh. I understand the sentiment, yet I would like to point out that it wasn't FR that killed other settings. The other settings killed TSR. If FR actually killed other settings the TSR would not spread its resources and might not go down. Or maybe it would anyway, only those who know more about internal affairs at TSR can make such guesses ().
Which I admit would be a shame either way because every major setting published by TSR in 90s had lots of appeal to me (despite me discovering most of them years later, in early 2000s so I wasn't there at the time they were actually published). Birthright, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Dragonlance (this was my first actual with AD&D, still in the middle of 90s when the Chronicles and Legends were published in Poland - after years it lost most of its shine to me, but I still like those two series, it had lot of crappy books too, however).
Back on-topic, I should mention that in like 30 years of gaming, I've almost never played in a pre-published setting. World-building was always half the fun of the game, for me.
As for kits, this was more a 2e AD&D thing than a FR thing IMO. As far as I know, only two FR supplements had kits (one for fighters and priests and one for wizards and rogues), but I might be wrong.
No, you are correct.
|
As for kits, this was more a 2e AD&D thing than a FR thing IMO. As far as I know, only two FR supplements had kits (one for fighters and priests and one for wizards and rogues), but I might be wrong.No, you are correct.
You missed one ;-)
There was "Demihumans of the Realms" as well as "Wizards And Rogues of the Realms", and "Warriors And Priests of the Realms",...
And if you count "Al-Qadim" (which I do as it was an "official" part of FR), it too had kits, and the rules were written for the setting with their use as non-optional...
Poor Mystara doesn't get the love it deserves, almost as old as the other two game worlds. It has classic adventures, awesome settings and memorable bad guys - B2, X1, Bargle, and the Grand Dutchy of Karamikos.
Drejk, thanks for the feedback.
Yeah, the problem with books. This is the result of abundance of poorly written books and enforcement of TSR code of ethics - good must triumph over evil, evil cannot be portrayed in any appealing fashion, etc.BTW: Note that keeping the same evil guys is what was put as a positive example in the article posted by Lisa under "persistent personified evil" - the author of that text thought that repeated use of the same evil NPCs is a good thing. When it comes to good book NPCs (Drizzit for example) this is the problem of not killing the golden-egg laying goose that prevented writers of keeping more of them dead.
I admit that I immunized myself that that in a very simple way - I am not treating any of the books for Forgotten Realms seriously, nor for most expanded universes as well. If I would do otherwise I would have to hate Star Wars as it shares with FR the problem of too many bad books being written.
How often GMs you played with actually used those NPCs? Myself I have never used them (I intend to use Khelben and his wife a bit when I finally manage to start Waterdhavian campaign, but it does not seem to be soon, but it will be the first such case in my games) and I don't recall anyone actually introducing such NPCs in games I played in.
I ran into several DMs who used the NPCs liberally, particularly Elminster and the Harpers. I've only PLAYED with two, however.
I understand principles lying behind this reason - fanatic fans soured me towards the old World Of Darkness. I didn't meet FR fanatics personally, however. And on the net I only found people mostly defending FR against attacks.
As a rather serious OWOD fan, I understand where you are coming from too. LOVED the material. Only played in exactly 4 serious games in my entire life, and that's after spending a considerable amount of money on the books.
This is not unique to FR - I have noticed similar problems completely unrelated to FR, players getting quickly borred of their current characters and wanting to try something new NOW. Especially when there are books with new options (3.5 splatbook bloat, I am looking at you, ah, and old WoD creeps books... you are on the list too).
Just because other people did it too doesn't mean that it's okay when FR does it. I view FR as the progenitor of this ugly practice(there, I said it).
Duh. I understand the sentiment, yet I would like to point out that it wasn't FR that killed other settings. The other settings killed TSR. If FR actually killed other settings the TSR would not spread its resources and might not go down. Or maybe it would anyway, only those who know more about internal affairs at TSR can make such guesses (does not look in direction of Lisa).
Which I admit would be a shame either way because every major setting published by TSR in 90s had lots of appeal to me (despite me discovering most of them years later, in early 2000s so I wasn't there at the time they were actually published). Birthright, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Dragonlance (this was my first actual with AD&D, still in the middle of 90s when the Chronicles and Legends were published in Poland - after years it lost most of its shine to me, but I still like those two series, it had lot of crappy books too, however).
I fear we are in a tom-a-to/tom-AH-to situation here. I will always hold FR responsible for the talent being sucked out of other settings and works and being poured into one world. YES, it made FR somewhat palatable most times and on rare occasion amazing. But it also resulted in other world, like Mystara, mentioned above, slipping into the ether forever.
Hi Lisa,
thanks - this was an interesting read. Do you know who the author is?It was somebody who went by the moniker of Night Screed. He was a pretty famous Greyhawk proponent from back in the 1990's.
-Lisa
I remember him (her?). Those old AOL GH forums. That's where I first read Erik's stuff (as Iquander). Some great stuff came out of those times, though I found years later that what I had saved were in some funky format I couldn't open any longer, so I had to get rid of them.
P.S. You post at times you should be sleeping! Nor are you the only one. I worry about Paizo staff being insomniacs. I'm hoping you were actually a few time zones away when you wrote this...
I would boil the differences down to this...
This was my favorite post in this thread, FWIW.
Here is an interesting article that was posted a while back called Putting the Grey in the Hawk. It talks about what makes Greyhawk work and how it is different from the Realms. Hopefully it helps to clarify the differences. It worked very well for me back in the day!
-Lisa
Putting The Grey In The Hawk [snip]
...
I never played much with published modules so perhaps my experience is off, but that article could have described the Realms just as much as Greyhawk (yeah, yeah, go ahead with the "blasphemy!" calls).
Adding to Drejk comments, I've not witnessed any games were Elminster and the Seven Sisters take precedence over the characters. Kelbhen Blackstaff makes as much an antagonist as a protagonist in many games (he often ends-up being both). Like Drejk, it is my impression that the author of Lisa's posted article has either a strong dislike and/or a poor understanding of Forgotten Realms, and failed to provide an objective analysis.
There are no doubt that the two settings are different, but not so much on the points given above, with two notable exceptions were I think the author was right:
1) Forgotten Realms does provided a more detailed description of the setting and contains more "fluff" material and much more "canon" novels (which obviously can color your perception of the Realms if all you know of them is the (sometimes poorly written) Realm's fiction. This has been criticized before, rightfully so IMO.
2) Forgotten Realm is a setting where people gather in groups of like-minded individuals and form societies, more than in Greyhawk at any case. Organizations do go beyond political and feudal boundaries, sometimes to the point of wondering what good being a duke or a king can be.
Otherwise, you could copy-paste his points on Experience, Maturity, Black/White, Conflict, Action, (perhaps not so much Presentation), It's my Nickel, Setting, History, Character Development, Roots etc to make the promotion of the Forgotten Realm (and I...
Well said Finster.