| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 06:07:13
I can't seem to bloody well find my old thread on this, so am going to repost this, as few folks seem unaware of it.
So a basic breakdown , you have the cosmic wheel coming back , ontop of the spelljammer and planescape.
Oddly enough, they also mentioned dragonlance and some of the older ones, it seems they may be publishing updates on the various settings, but depending on sales to determine if they get anything more then that.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130701 |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 23 Aug 2013 : 05:34:05
quote:
Originally posted by jerrod
Which is more popular fr or gh? I started with d&d,then krynn,forgotten realms,ravenloff,and planescape.
I think it would depend on which D&D-era you're asking about.
Certainly, during much of the 1990's, the FORGOTTEN REALMS, PLANESCAPE, SPELLJAMMER, and RAVENLOFT had enjoyed enough popularity for them all to be supported by extended product lines. [Some more so than others, of course.] |
| Therise |
Posted - 22 Aug 2013 : 23:14:10
Greyhawk was my first setting, and I absolutely still consider myself a fan of Greyhawk. I will say, though, Greyhawk is an entirely different kind of beast than the Realms with entirely different problems and issues. For one thing, Greyhawk has never (in my opinion) been the kind of setting that takes itself very seriously. There are certainly many people who are very serious about creating things for it, but when Gygax threw in things like the "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks" and explained most of the extremely weird mythological monsters as "some wizard did that," it was the setting for a fun excursion but not immersion.
The Realms, on the other hand, has almost always been about deep, immersive stories. History, ecology, unique poison-brewing, the Realms had it. Over the years, fans have asked for more depth, more detail, and Ed has always been happy to provide. I don't think Gygax necessarily wanted that kind of immersion, and in many ways pulled away from Dave Arneson who could have provided exactly that.
Back near the end of Dungeon as a print magazine, the brilliant people at Paizo made one of the single best adventure paths I have ever seen: the Age of Worms. It was set in Greyhawk, and you could tell that people like Erik Mona deeply loved Greyhawk. It had all the quirky Greyhawk-ish bells and whistles that you'd expect from Gygax and his setting, and culminated with a fight against an evil god's avatar. It had a really nice set of instructions for how to modify it for the Realms (by Eric Boyd, IIRC), but it clearly was designed in-and-out for that tone and feel of Greyhawk.
Where Greyhawk often involved death-around-every-corner scenarios and yet also kept a weird sense of humor (consider "Mishka the Wolf-Spider" and "Zuggtmoy" as scary fiends), the Realms pulled much more for heroic stories in a more generalized fantasy world. No doubt, the Realms has its own weirdness and serious quirks, but it's much more PC-friendly and much more "standard" fantasy imagery. Where the Realms goes even better, you'll get monster ecologies and deep history that explains things in a much deeper story than Greyhawk ever did. It could have had that with Arneson, had things worked into more of a partnership and the whole weird company control stuff hadn't been going on at TSR. The whole "Greyhawk Wars" thing also didn't help that setting one bit.
|
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 22 Aug 2013 : 22:33:21
The Realms is what it is because of Ed. And I'm not just tooting his horn (I anticipate a snicker from THO) because in this case it doesn't matter whether you personally like his style. The point is that he's ridiculously prolific, and a lot of people do like his style. Gary Gygax wrote a lot too... probably at least ten times what we've seen, but Gary's loss of basically sole creative control over Greyhawk was worse than the situation we have with the Realms. A better way of saying that might be that Ed didn't lose as much influence over the Realms as Gary lost over Greyhawk.
Gary also had an uphill battle. He was trying to get the world excited about D&D and about Greyhawk. In contrast, Ed didn't have to fight for the Realms to be popular. He puts a lot into it, but D&D already has a fanbase, and WotC is doing the legwork as far as attracting more fans to the game (no judgment about their skill, at this particular moment), and the authors & fans are pulling people into the setting. So where Gary's attention was divided, Ed's can be focused.
Greyhawk seems to have been developed from large to small, at least once you get beyond the city itself. Look at the map, find a space, write about it. I'm not minimizing the quality of the writing; I'm just simplifying what seems to have been the process. There's some of that in the Realms too, but according to Ed that's not how he built the Realms. It was from small to large. Forget the map for a second, picture a tavern, describe it, walk outside, talk about the street and the people on it, and the intersecting streets, and when you've got a good feel for that town and how it works, pick a road leading out of town. Now you can look at the map. Figure out where this place is getting all the goods it needs, and what it's selling to other towns, and how far away those places should be to enable produce and meats to remain fresh in the absence of refrigeration technology. Keep going to new towns, with a keen eye on the larger scale but investing your energy in the little places; the big things will take shape as an organic result. This focus on details, and Ed's love of words and relationships (not just between people but also places and things), is what makes the Realms bigger than the paper it's printed on. Greyhawk doesn't have nearly as much of that. None of WotC's other settings have had this delectable concoction of wonder.
That's why I say that the Realms is what it is because Ed is what he is. Not because the other authors don't matter... they do, because a world is too big of a place for one person to describe. But the best authors will share the qualities Ed has, which make their work live and breathe. Greyhawk (or Planescape or Spelljammer, as I look back at the top of the page to see the actual topic  ), in order to shine like the Realms, needs an Ed. Someone insanely prolific, with a talent for creating four-dimensional images using words, and a quirk that turns every name they see into the lifestory of a person, a house, a city, a civilization, a world. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Aug 2013 : 22:28:02
quote:
Originally posted by jerrod
Which is more popular fr or gh? I started with d&d,then krynn,forgotten realms,ravenloff,and planescape.
I think FR is more popular, but that's based more on the support for the setting than anything else -- the Realms has had a lot more novels and source material, and support for the Realms has been continuous(-ish). I don't know of many Greyhawk novels, and I don't believe that anything has been published under the Greyhawk imprint since the end of 2E.
There could be more Greyhawk fans than FR fans -- but if there are, WotC hasn't been reaching out to them as much. |
| jerrod |
Posted - 22 Aug 2013 : 21:35:54
Which is more popular fr or gh? I started with d&d,then krynn,forgotten realms,ravenloff,and planescape. |
| jerrod |
Posted - 22 Aug 2013 : 21:35:35
Which is more popular fr or gh? I started with d&d,then krynn,forgotten realms,ravenloff,and planescape. |
| Lord Bane |
Posted - 22 Aug 2013 : 11:22:31
I wouldn´t say they tried to make it their core setting. They forced rule changes on the setting and impose things of CORE into the realms but they were not going to put the realms in place of their core setting. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 21 Aug 2013 : 23:11:51
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
As I see it, GREYHAWK needs continued support -- whether some of us like it or not. I'd even go so far as to say that it really is integral to so much of the history of D&D, that to not have GREYHAWK as core, would actually be detrimental to the game itself.
Well we saw what happened with the Realms in 4e. Not only did they try to make the Realms core, but they changed how magic worked in terms of game mechanics and decided to force the change into lore instead of pretending "this is how it's always been" or making the fluff work with the crunch. (It's not like the Realms didn't already have something very close to the Shadowfell. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 21 Aug 2013 : 22:52:06
Some of the later 2e Greyhawk material was great (Marklands, Iuz) and I really really really wish SOMEONE would publish a Castle Zagyg module/accessory based on Gygax's view of the dungeon (Greyhawk Ruins was not entirely his rendition of it).
From a business standpoint, it makes sense to continue to support the setting (as already stated, it has a large and vocal fan base).
|
| Old Man Harpell |
Posted - 21 Aug 2013 : 11:28:31
More than any other D&D world, Greyhawk feels like the place where many people around the gaming table tossed their ideas, and someone DM-ish (Gygax, most likely)stuck them all into a semi-cohesive whole. And for the most part, managed to make it work. It lacks (in my opinion) that seamless feel that the Realms, Krynn, Cerilia (Birthright) and Athas have (I have spent almost no time with Eberron, thus, I won't try and measure it against anything else), however. And Mystara is almost as bad as Greyhawk (though for some reason, I do like Mystara quite a bit).
Any book from any of these worlds, I would fork out the money for - I have not entirely lost my RPG/gaming book addiction (though it is much less severe than in years gone by). Every world has something that a prospective DM can use, whether in-world or translated into a homebrew. At least, that's what the RPG junkie in me always says.
- OMH |
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 21 Aug 2013 : 06:28:46
Eh GReyhawk as far as story goes, just never hit it with me, just feels dated and bland. Even in that sort of retrospective look , it just doesn't seem to offer me all that much. Even Dark Sun has more to offer then grey hawk to me atlest. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 21 Aug 2013 : 03:57:46
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'd buy a Greyhawk book if one was made -- at least the main setting book.
Agreed.
I still refer to most of the GH sources -- even though I haven't ran a strictly Oerth-based campaign in over 15 years. There's still a lot of campaign goodies to be mined from those old tomes... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 15:36:18
I'd buy a Greyhawk book if one was made -- at least the main setting book. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 15:14:51
As I see it, GREYHAWK needs continued support -- whether some of us like it or not. I'd even go so far as to say that it really is integral to so much of the history of D&D, that to not have GREYHAWK as core, would actually be detrimental to the game itself. |
| Venger |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 13:28:06
Well, it certainly wouldn't hurt to release a comprehensive campaign setting book for each world, whether it be Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or whatever. Depending on the sales for each they could always come back and revisit them with future supplements, but a solid campaign setting book would be nice. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 13:18:00
I'm no fan of Greyhawk myself, but that setting has a huge fanbase, too, and some of those fans are far more rabid than most FR fans are.
I'm not going to support dropping something just because it's not my gig. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 12:23:47
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Bane
Greyhawk is overrated in my opinion. Sure it was the setting Gygax made the first moves but when it comes to the flavor of things it is vastly inferior to the realms and you may disagree but WOTC should finally drop it and concentrate on other settings with centerstage spotlight on the realms.
While I agree the Realms is superior (I'm bias, I'm a Realms fan,) dropping the old was one of the things they did to alienate the old guard. That said, it's in Greyhawk's "inferiority" IMHO that makes it a more open setting to people wanting to muck about and not worry about events and timelines. |
| Lord Bane |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 12:05:15
Greyhawk is overrated in my opinion. Sure it was the setting Gygax made the first moves but when it comes to the flavor of things it is vastly inferior to the realms and you may disagree but WOTC should finally drop it and concentrate on other settings with centerstage spotlight on the realms. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 04:27:23
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
WotC needs to take a page out of Paizo's book...they are working on a single setting to IMMENSELY GREAT effect. WotC needs to restore license to other companies to work on DL, Ravenloft, etc. and focus on no more than three themselves (the Realms, Eberron, and Greyhawk). If WotC spreads their effort too thin they are gonna screw the pooch methinks. But that's just my opinion.
I agree. If they really want to restore some of the old D&D, they need to give Greyhawk attention MOSTLY because the vast majority of "classic" modules are all "set" in Greyhawk. They can capture a lot of good will from fans that don't care about the Realms or Eberron by paying attention to it.
Plus, I think Greyhawk has less baggage then the Realms if they plan on competing with Golarion. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 20 Aug 2013 : 03:21:19
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
You know, I think the rights to the term "Planescape" opened up recently. It's entirely possible someone could create their own version . . .
Cheers
Hmmm. It's long been a while since I last heard anything... but I thought the license for the term was still being contended by interested parties? |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 23:25:52
I‘m all for more planar lore ... even inconsisten lore is welcome since, after all, not even the Powers have the ability to truly comprehend the finer workings of the entire cosmos. Characters from the Realms (or any other Prime, or even places like Sigil and beyond) should have an overabundance of muddled fantastic cosmological models which far surpasses the limits we understand in our own rather mundane universe. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 22:55:26
You know, I think the rights to the term "Planescape" opened up recently. It's entirely possible someone could create their own version . . .
Cheers |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 22:45:13
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
quote:
The fact that SJ lore wasn't checked against setting-specific lore isn't a failure of the vision for the setting, it's an editorial failure.
Agreed. Much of the SJ (and PS) writing was great and I'm okay with them receiving some love. That said, I never really liked the crystal spheres/phlogiston model. I just assume that most of the settings are close to each other (close being a relative term when it comes to interstellar distances  ).
I also don't care for Ravenloft (which I think should be licensed out again) and Faerie being between the pos/neg planes...just seems off to me.
I actually liked the crystal spheres/phlogiston idea. It gave you a sense of the finite power a deity could have if they're only in one crystal sphere and why they would expand to multiple worlds if they could. It was also kind of interesting to see this place where you didn't have access to your god anymore. I'd like to see some kind of "better" rules for what happens whenever you enter a new crystal sphere where your god does not exist.... though I'm not sure what to do. Something makes me say that the idea of aliases and people travelling between crystal spheres could have a whole article put to it. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 18:58:33
quote:
I liked how Spelljammer took some of the crazier theories in real life about how the cosmos worked before we had the instruments to do actual astronomy and physics, and made them somehow workable.
Hollow World is another example of an ancient theory worked into the game (one that I use, btw). |
| Lord Bane |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 18:36:31
Multiplanar spelljamming awesomeness! *coughs* Sorry about that...
I very much welcome the return of Planescape and Spelljammer into the fold of things, it truely expands the settings and binds them together to truely create a vast multiverse and places for evil to conquer and triumph! |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 18:31:16
I liked how Spelljammer took some of the crazier theories in real life about how the cosmos worked before we had the instruments to do actual astronomy and physics, and made them somehow workable. And I agree, tying the settings together was one of the two explicit goals of SJ from the beginning (the second being pushing as much crazy awesome weirdness into a single setting as possible).
But as long as they don't outright remove the interconnectedness that SJ allows, I'm fine with them developing more uniquely-SJ stuff. More products like Rock of Braal, for instance. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 18:01:07
quote:
The fact that SJ lore wasn't checked against setting-specific lore isn't a failure of the vision for the setting, it's an editorial failure.
Agreed. Much of the SJ (and PS) writing was great and I'm okay with them receiving some love. That said, I never really liked the crystal spheres/phlogiston model. I just assume that most of the settings are close to each other (close being a relative term when it comes to interstellar distances ).
I also don't care for Ravenloft (which I think should be licensed out again) and Faerie being between the pos/neg planes...just seems off to me. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 17:39:29
Oh, and I disagree with the idea that using Spelljammer to connect the settings "muddied its vision". Sure, some of the SJ lore that referred to other campaign settings was flat out wonky, but part of the point of the setting was to connect them all. It was a design objective, not something added on later.
The fact that SJ lore wasn't checked against setting-specific lore isn't a failure of the vision for the setting, it's an editorial failure. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 17:31:49
I'm not a huge fan of the idea of splitting the elemental planes like that, but on the flip side, you could say it's just conforming to the Rule of Threes.
Isn't the Ethereal plane like that, too?
It does mesh the Elemental Chaos -- an idea I hated, by the way -- with the Planescape set up, and I'll give them points for that...
So overall, for the elemental planes, I can't complain.
I do like the idea of Faerie existing between the Prime and the Positive Energy Plane, but I don't like the idea of it as a intermediary plane -- I prefer my Faerie to be connected to both, but not really between them.
Similarly, I can see connecting Ravenloft to the Negative Energy Plane, but not as a place between. I prefer Ravenloft to remain a demiplane. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 19 Aug 2013 : 16:35:17
Hmm. Now that's the first mostly positive news I've heard in a long time. I don't particularly like the idea of splitting the Inner Planes into threes, and I think having Ravenloft as the gateway to the Negative Plane is just weird, but overall, good things to see, and they make more logical sense than a lot of stuff that's come out of WotC over the years. |
|
|
