Question for the Living Greyhawk people, Erik and Gary. - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Question for the Living Greyhawk people, Erik and Gary.

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
zombiegleemax
May 15, 2004 19:45:05 I was talking to a friend of mine who mentioned, a month or two back, that there'll be a compilation of the Living Greyhawk Journal appearing in the not too distant future. At first, I was sceptical (I've heard these rumors before), but his certainty kept bugging me, so I have to ask if there is any truth to this one.

Anything you can offer?
#2
erik_mona
May 15, 2004 19:59:03 It's something we'd like very much to do. It's something we've run all the way up the flagpole. It's not something that's going to happen in the next year.

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine
#3
zombiegleemax
May 16, 2004 17:06:20 If it's something that won't happen soon, might I make a suggestion?

Rather than compile articles and publication dates, why not break down the articles to conform to a sourcebook layout? There's more than enough stuff to be divided down into classes, monsters, geography, etc.

Anyway, just a thought.
#4
caeruleus
May 17, 2004 19:55:54
Originally posted by sedrorovin murghurobag
If it's something that won't happen soon, might I make a suggestion?

Rather than compile articles and publication dates, why not break down the articles to conform to a sourcebook layout? There's more than enough stuff to be divided down into classes, monsters, geography, etc.

Anyway, just a thought.

And a very good thought. I'd love something like that.
#5
zombiegleemax
May 17, 2004 21:25:08 Here's my question:

If you're talking about publishing a new GH book, why not make it a better "core" Greyhawk?

I'm talking like a revised, expanded, high production value version of the LGG. Hardcover with decent art and at least 100 more pages.

A core book that wouldn't look incomplete and shabby on the shelves next to the new Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms books would do the setting as a whole a lot more good by growing the player base than a compilation of old magazine articles ever could.

An opportunity to release a new GH book doesn't happen every day. It would be a shame to waste it on something targeted squarely at a small cadre of grognards that does nothing to grow the player base.
#6
zombiegleemax
May 18, 2004 2:09:22
Originally posted by Yamo
An opportunity to release a new GH book doesn't happen every day. It would be a shame to waste it on something targeted squarely at a small cadre of grognards that does nothing to grow the player base.

I'm not sure if you don't know what Living Greyhawk is or if you don't know what a Grognard is. I will attempt to explain both for you.

Living Greyhawk has (I have no idea, I'll guess, someone will post the correct number) 30,000 active members and is the largest, fastest growing Greyhawk campaign there. It is currently the Number one thing pushing the growth of the fan base. A compilation of its Journals would not be targeted at a small cadre of anything.

Grognards I know more about, having sympathy to some of their opininions. They think Greyhawk should have been left under the control of EGG and don't like anything that has come out since 1987. They hang out at the Wyrmstoe (name changed to protect the guilty) cite and have conversations like this:

Grognard 1: EM and GH were in Diapers while EGG and RJK were playing in the basement, how can they write anything about the setting?
Grognard 2: Oh, RM is the culprit. His stuff was terrible.
Grognard 3: ZC, SW and SR didn't help, they produced pure blasphemy.
Grognard 4: NO, it was ruined with CS, everything after that was stabbing a dead body.
Grognard 5: You know, even letting LL and FM be involved was probably a mistake.

Grognard's will only be interested in products if they are done by certain authors.

Oh by the way, if you know who all those initials refer too, you need another hobby. Lord knows I do.
#7
zombiegleemax
May 18, 2004 9:16:19
They hang out at the Wyrmstoe (name changed to protect the guilty)

lol, that was a good laugh!

I must be a partial Grognard. My view is that Living Greyhawk hinders Greyhawk by putting control and approval rights into the hands of the triad petty writers. People who have no funding to higher professional grade writers (such as Gygax and Sargent) and put serious, official, quality Greyhawk, on the shelves of my local bookstore.

What a waste...
#8
zombiegleemax
May 18, 2004 10:38:52 Living Greyhawk hinders the setting?
By introducing tens of thousands of players to it beyond the joke that is the supposed core setting label or by daring to sully the name without the great EGGs name on it?

Without LG GH would be almost dead to new players so the extra exposure and interest it generates can only be a good thing.
#9
Brom_Blackforge
May 18, 2004 12:23:39
Originally posted by StevieS
Living Greyhawk hinders the setting?

I think we all know that without Living Greyhawk, the Greyhawk setting may well have fallen completely off the radar by now. Certainly, we wouldn't be getting the Living Greyhawk Journal - we wouldn't even have the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer. Yes, LG is bringing new people into the setting. For that, it is good.

However, Living Greyhawk tends to make people who aren't interested in a living game feel like they're on the outside looking in. For instance, there are many adventure scenarios that have been created for LG, but the only way to get them is to join LG. (The reasons for that have been discussed exhaustively in other threads, and it's not my goal here to reopen that discussion.) In a sense, the new players won by the LG campaign have been won at the expense of existing players.

Then there's the aspect that Abysslin mentioned: the LG campaign has been arranged such that nothing is permitted to conflict with campaign "canon" as established by the triads. For a setting whose fan base tends to fracture along lines of authorship, the creative control given to the triads can be a divisive issue.

I think there's generally a feeling that Living Greyhawk has hindered Greyhawk as a published setting. (Again, since it has given us the LGG and LGJ, that may not be an entirely fair charge, but it seems that there is also some truth to it.) That's really what the complaint is, isn't it? I mean, if we were content to simply collect out-of-print Greyhawk products and homebrew our own additions or modifications, why would we care about Living Greyhawk? We want to see more stuff published.

I'm not sure that the LG campaign is really the problem, though. I think the real problem is WotC's decision to treat Greyhawk as little more than a proper name generator. Although WotC says Greyhawk is the core setting, it has done everything it can to make Greyhawk into a generic setting. (Witness the fact that the series of modules published at the advent of 3rd ed. - "Sunless Citadel," "Forge of Fury," etc. - were not placed anywhere specific in Greyhawk, the supposed core setting. The same is true of the adventures that appear each month in Dungeon magazine. Meanwhile, following the release of Eberron, WotC will release Eberron-specific modules to support the setting.) If Greyhawk is the core setting, then it should be treated like a setting. Genericizing it robs it of the qualities that make it a unique setting. That's what I think really bothers Greyhawk fans about the setting's current treatment, and that is not the fault of Living Greyhawk.
#10
zombiegleemax
May 18, 2004 12:54:47
Originally posted by Brom Blackforge
I think there's generally a feeling that Living Greyhawk has hindered Greyhawk as a published setting. (Again, since it has given us the LGG and LGJ, that may not be an entirely fair charge, but it seems that there is also some truth to it.) That's really what the complaint is, isn't it? I mean, if we were content to simply collect out-of-print Greyhawk products and homebrew our own additions or modifications, why would we care about Living Greyhawk? We want to see more stuff published.

I'm not sure that the LG campaign is really the problem, though. I think the real problem is WotC's decision to treat Greyhawk as little more than a proper name generator. Although WotC says Greyhawk is the core setting, it has done everything it can to make Greyhawk into a generic setting. (Witness the fact that the series of modules published at the advent of 3rd ed. - "Sunless Citadel," "Forge of Fury," etc. - were not placed anywhere specific in Greyhawk, the supposed core setting. The same is true of the adventures that appear each month in Dungeon magazine. Meanwhile, following the release of Eberron, WotC will release Eberron-specific modules to support the setting.) If Greyhawk is the core setting, then it should be treated like a setting. Genericizing it robs it of the qualities that make it a unique setting. That's what I think really bothers Greyhawk fans about the setting's current treatment, and that is not the fault of Living Greyhawk. [/b]

Well I can only agree with the last part of what you said, we'd (almost) all like to see new GH stuff but it just ain't gonna happen as I read the tea-leaves and I honestly don't see LG having in any way stopped it.

If anything LG should have fuelled interest and at least asked the question about the viability of some official WotC-type releases. The concept of GH as the core setting is just a joke in my eyes.
#11
mortellan
May 18, 2004 15:19:46
If Greyhawk is the core setting, then it should be treated like a setting. Genericizing it robs it of the qualities that make it a unique setting. That's what I think really bothers Greyhawk fans about the setting's current treatment, and that is not the fault of Living Greyhawk.

Agreed, I would prefer FR or Eberron be the core world. It wouldn't change the D&D product's impact one iota.
#12
zombiegleemax
May 18, 2004 15:48:47 heh, can't argue with illusions of granduer.
#13
zombiegleemax
May 18, 2004 16:13:34
I'm not sure if you don't know what Living Greyhawk is or if you don't know what a Grognard is. I will attempt to explain both for you.

Semantics is a fool's game. Bottom line: A new core book would grow the player base while a magazine compilation will only service the existing (far too small) one.

It's a hard point to refute.
#14
zombiegleemax
May 21, 2004 0:52:30
Originally posted by Yamo
Semantics is a fool's game. Bottom line: A new core book would grow the player base while a magazine compilation will only service the existing (far too small) one.

It's a hard point to refute.

And you can't have both? From what I understand there are actually quite a large number of people currently playing Living Greyhawk. Some of the older LGJ articles are difficult to find, but still useful. And a compilation should be a fairly simple thing to put together. A minor project compared to making a new core book. So minor that it should not really interfere with doing a new core book. I can sympathize with your desire for the latter, but I'm having trouble understanding your opposition to the former.
#15
Brom_Blackforge
May 21, 2004 11:35:59
Originally posted by StevieS
Well I can only agree with the last part of what you said, we'd (almost) all like to see new GH stuff but it just ain't gonna happen as I read the tea-leaves and I honestly don't see LG having in any way stopped it.

For my part, I'm not saying that Living Greyhawk has prevented the release of new Greyhawk materials. If WotC really wanted to publish new Greyhawk books, they could and they would. The problem is that they don't want to. They prefer to treat the setting as nothing more than a proper noun generator. (And, for those fans who more than anything fear that a new Greyhawk release would just mess up the setting - or mess it up more - the current treatment is fine with them.)

Now, does it help matters that any new Greyhawk product would need LG approval? It's not an insurmountable obstacle, but it's another hoop. And, more significantly, it leads to the perception that LG is hindering the development of the setting. Is it a fair perception? I don't know. The fact that approval is required is true enough. On the other hand, without the LG campaign, we wouldn't have the LGG and the LGJ, like I said.
#16
Argon
May 21, 2004 22:55:26 Well if you think about it. even if their weren't any triads you would still need to get your work past an editors desk so lets not say LG prevents Gh from growing I just think that with the triads you make it a too many cheifs not enough indians scenario for more published work. One of the reasons most Dungeon adventures are not location specific.
#17
zombiegleemax
May 22, 2004 12:55:24 Triad, shmriad.

Let's get to work on that sourcebook.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombiegleemax May 15, 2004 19:45:05	I was talking to a friend of mine who mentioned, a month or two back, that there'll be a compilation of the Living Greyhawk Journal appearing in the not too distant future. At first, I was sceptical (I've heard these rumors before), but his certainty kept bugging me, so I have to ask if there is any truth to this one. Anything you can offer?
#2 erik_mona May 15, 2004 19:59:03	It's something we'd like very much to do. It's something we've run all the way up the flagpole. It's not something that's going to happen in the next year. --Erik Mona Editor-in-Chief Dungeon Magazine
#3 zombiegleemax May 16, 2004 17:06:20	If it's something that won't happen soon, might I make a suggestion? Rather than compile articles and publication dates, why not break down the articles to conform to a sourcebook layout? There's more than enough stuff to be divided down into classes, monsters, geography, etc. Anyway, just a thought.
#4 caeruleus May 17, 2004 19:55:54	Originally posted by sedrorovin murghurobag If it's something that won't happen soon, might I make a suggestion? Rather than compile articles and publication dates, why not break down the articles to conform to a sourcebook layout? There's more than enough stuff to be divided down into classes, monsters, geography, etc. Anyway, just a thought. And a very good thought. I'd love something like that.
#5 zombiegleemax May 17, 2004 21:25:08	Here's my question: If you're talking about publishing a new GH book, why not make it a better "core" Greyhawk? I'm talking like a revised, expanded, high production value version of the LGG. Hardcover with decent art and at least 100 more pages. A core book that wouldn't look incomplete and shabby on the shelves next to the new Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms books would do the setting as a whole a lot more good by growing the player base than a compilation of old magazine articles ever could. An opportunity to release a new GH book doesn't happen every day. It would be a shame to waste it on something targeted squarely at a small cadre of grognards that does nothing to grow the player base.
#6 zombiegleemax May 18, 2004 2:09:22	Originally posted by Yamo An opportunity to release a new GH book doesn't happen every day. It would be a shame to waste it on something targeted squarely at a small cadre of grognards that does nothing to grow the player base. I'm not sure if you don't know what Living Greyhawk is or if you don't know what a Grognard is. I will attempt to explain both for you. Living Greyhawk has (I have no idea, I'll guess, someone will post the correct number) 30,000 active members and is the largest, fastest growing Greyhawk campaign there. It is currently the Number one thing pushing the growth of the fan base. A compilation of its Journals would not be targeted at a small cadre of anything. Grognards I know more about, having sympathy to some of their opininions. They think Greyhawk should have been left under the control of EGG and don't like anything that has come out since 1987. They hang out at the Wyrmstoe (name changed to protect the guilty) cite and have conversations like this: Grognard 1: EM and GH were in Diapers while EGG and RJK were playing in the basement, how can they write anything about the setting? Grognard 2: Oh, RM is the culprit. His stuff was terrible. Grognard 3: ZC, SW and SR didn't help, they produced pure blasphemy. Grognard 4: NO, it was ruined with CS, everything after that was stabbing a dead body. Grognard 5: You know, even letting LL and FM be involved was probably a mistake. Grognard's will only be interested in products if they are done by certain authors. Oh by the way, if you know who all those initials refer too, you need another hobby. Lord knows I do.
#7 zombiegleemax May 18, 2004 9:16:19	They hang out at the Wyrmstoe (name changed to protect the guilty) lol, that was a good laugh! I must be a partial Grognard. My view is that Living Greyhawk hinders Greyhawk by putting control and approval rights into the hands of the triad petty writers. People who have no funding to higher professional grade writers (such as Gygax and Sargent) and put serious, official, quality Greyhawk, on the shelves of my local bookstore. What a waste...
#8 zombiegleemax May 18, 2004 10:38:52	Living Greyhawk hinders the setting? By introducing tens of thousands of players to it beyond the joke that is the supposed core setting label or by daring to sully the name without the great EGGs name on it? Without LG GH would be almost dead to new players so the extra exposure and interest it generates can only be a good thing.
#9 Brom_Blackforge May 18, 2004 12:23:39	Originally posted by StevieS Living Greyhawk hinders the setting? I think we all know that without Living Greyhawk, the Greyhawk setting may well have fallen completely off the radar by now. Certainly, we wouldn't be getting the Living Greyhawk Journal - we wouldn't even have the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer. Yes, LG is bringing new people into the setting. For that, it is good. However, Living Greyhawk tends to make people who aren't interested in a living game feel like they're on the outside looking in. For instance, there are many adventure scenarios that have been created for LG, but the only way to get them is to join LG. (The reasons for that have been discussed exhaustively in other threads, and it's not my goal here to reopen that discussion.) In a sense, the new players won by the LG campaign have been won at the expense of existing players. Then there's the aspect that Abysslin mentioned: the LG campaign has been arranged such that nothing is permitted to conflict with campaign "canon" as established by the triads. For a setting whose fan base tends to fracture along lines of authorship, the creative control given to the triads can be a divisive issue. I think there's generally a feeling that Living Greyhawk has hindered Greyhawk as a published setting. (Again, since it has given us the LGG and LGJ, that may not be an entirely fair charge, but it seems that there is also some truth to it.) That's really what the complaint is, isn't it? I mean, if we were content to simply collect out-of-print Greyhawk products and homebrew our own additions or modifications, why would we care about Living Greyhawk? We want to see more stuff published. I'm not sure that the LG campaign is really the problem, though. I think the real problem is WotC's decision to treat Greyhawk as little more than a proper name generator. Although WotC says Greyhawk is the core setting, it has done everything it can to make Greyhawk into a generic setting. (Witness the fact that the series of modules published at the advent of 3rd ed. - "Sunless Citadel," "Forge of Fury," etc. - were not placed anywhere specific in Greyhawk, the supposed core setting. The same is true of the adventures that appear each month in Dungeon magazine. Meanwhile, following the release of Eberron, WotC will release Eberron-specific modules to support the setting.) If Greyhawk is the core setting, then it should be treated like a setting. Genericizing it robs it of the qualities that make it a unique setting. That's what I think really bothers Greyhawk fans about the setting's current treatment, and that is not the fault of Living Greyhawk.
#10 zombiegleemax May 18, 2004 12:54:47	Originally posted by Brom Blackforge I think there's generally a feeling that Living Greyhawk has hindered Greyhawk as a published setting. (Again, since it has given us the LGG and LGJ, that may not be an entirely fair charge, but it seems that there is also some truth to it.) That's really what the complaint is, isn't it? I mean, if we were content to simply collect out-of-print Greyhawk products and homebrew our own additions or modifications, why would we care about Living Greyhawk? We want to see more stuff published. I'm not sure that the LG campaign is really the problem, though. I think the real problem is WotC's decision to treat Greyhawk as little more than a proper name generator. Although WotC says Greyhawk is the core setting, it has done everything it can to make Greyhawk into a generic setting. (Witness the fact that the series of modules published at the advent of 3rd ed. - "Sunless Citadel," "Forge of Fury," etc. - were not placed anywhere specific in Greyhawk, the supposed core setting. The same is true of the adventures that appear each month in Dungeon magazine. Meanwhile, following the release of Eberron, WotC will release Eberron-specific modules to support the setting.) If Greyhawk is the core setting, then it should be treated like a setting. Genericizing it robs it of the qualities that make it a unique setting. That's what I think really bothers Greyhawk fans about the setting's current treatment, and that is not the fault of Living Greyhawk. [/b] Well I can only agree with the last part of what you said, we'd (almost) all like to see new GH stuff but it just ain't gonna happen as I read the tea-leaves and I honestly don't see LG having in any way stopped it. If anything LG should have fuelled interest and at least asked the question about the viability of some official WotC-type releases. The concept of GH as the core setting is just a joke in my eyes.
#11 mortellan May 18, 2004 15:19:46	If Greyhawk is the core setting, then it should be treated like a setting. Genericizing it robs it of the qualities that make it a unique setting. That's what I think really bothers Greyhawk fans about the setting's current treatment, and that is not the fault of Living Greyhawk. Agreed, I would prefer FR or Eberron be the core world. It wouldn't change the D&D product's impact one iota.
#12 zombiegleemax May 18, 2004 15:48:47	heh, can't argue with illusions of granduer.
#13 zombiegleemax May 18, 2004 16:13:34	I'm not sure if you don't know what Living Greyhawk is or if you don't know what a Grognard is. I will attempt to explain both for you. Semantics is a fool's game. Bottom line: A new core book would grow the player base while a magazine compilation will only service the existing (far too small) one. It's a hard point to refute.
#14 zombiegleemax May 21, 2004 0:52:30	Originally posted by Yamo Semantics is a fool's game. Bottom line: A new core book would grow the player base while a magazine compilation will only service the existing (far too small) one. It's a hard point to refute. And you can't have both? From what I understand there are actually quite a large number of people currently playing Living Greyhawk. Some of the older LGJ articles are difficult to find, but still useful. And a compilation should be a fairly simple thing to put together. A minor project compared to making a new core book. So minor that it should not really interfere with doing a new core book. I can sympathize with your desire for the latter, but I'm having trouble understanding your opposition to the former.
#15 Brom_Blackforge May 21, 2004 11:35:59	Originally posted by StevieS Well I can only agree with the last part of what you said, we'd (almost) all like to see new GH stuff but it just ain't gonna happen as I read the tea-leaves and I honestly don't see LG having in any way stopped it. For my part, I'm not saying that Living Greyhawk has prevented the release of new Greyhawk materials. If WotC really wanted to publish new Greyhawk books, they could and they would. The problem is that they don't want to. They prefer to treat the setting as nothing more than a proper noun generator. (And, for those fans who more than anything fear that a new Greyhawk release would just mess up the setting - or mess it up more - the current treatment is fine with them.) Now, does it help matters that any new Greyhawk product would need LG approval? It's not an insurmountable obstacle, but it's another hoop. And, more significantly, it leads to the perception that LG is hindering the development of the setting. Is it a fair perception? I don't know. The fact that approval is required is true enough. On the other hand, without the LG campaign, we wouldn't have the LGG and the LGJ, like I said.
#16 Argon May 21, 2004 22:55:26	Well if you think about it. even if their weren't any triads you would still need to get your work past an editors desk so lets not say LG prevents Gh from growing I just think that with the triads you make it a too many cheifs not enough indians scenario for more published work. One of the reasons most Dungeon adventures are not location specific.
#17 zombiegleemax May 22, 2004 12:55:24	Triad, shmriad. Let's get to work on that sourcebook.