Just wondering if anybody has heard anything...I sat in on a seminar about the future of Dragon and Dungeon magazines with Erik Mona and his staff. During the session erik mentioned that WOTC has discouraged them from mentioning GH City by name or as a location in any adventures. After the session there was a question and answer period. I asked "If WOTC doesn't want you to mention GH City by name it would seem they would just let Greyhawk go and have someone else develop it like Dragonlance or Ravenloft. Is there any chance of that happening?" Erik said that he has asked for that very thing and he has been turned down. He said he was as baffled by it as the rest of us. This gets better, stick with me. BTW anything in quotes is as best as I remember it, heavily paraphrased from my concussion addled brain.
Later, in the exhibition hall, my DM mortellan and I were walking around and being total nerds anytime we saw/recognized someone famous or semi-famous. Dave Arneson (looking very lonely), Weis and Hickman, Dave Elmore, Sean Reynolds, Dean Hagland, etc. At any rate we were walking along and mort says "That's Ed Greenwood." There he sat, looking as lonely as Arneson and very much like Elminster in a t-shirt. I jokingly said "Want to walk up and shake hands or give him an earful?" to which he promptly vanished as I made a b-line for Mr. Forgotten Realms, as mort was sure I would make a pro-Greyhawk scene.
I stepped right up as no one else was around (which I thought was kinda wierd) put my hand out and said "It's an honor Mr. Greenwood." He shook my hand and then handed me a plastic Elminster fig for the minis game. We talked for at least two minutes...about Greyhawk! I started by admitting I hadn't played much FR as my DM was a Greyphile. He said "That's no problem at all. I'm a big Greyhawk fan myself. You must remember that when I started playing Greyhawk was the only setting we had. I get excited when I see new Greyhawk products." I mentioned my conversation with Erik Mona that I'd had just a few minutes before and he said "Well it's funny that you say that..." and then he dropped a bomb shell!
Mr. Greenwood said he's heard scuttlebutt that GH will be dropped as the "Core setting" when 4th edition inevitably makes its debut (sorry I never thought to ask when) and that that will be the first move to free GH from the ties that bind it to WOTC and license it out to another company. He said "And they should too, it's too good a setting to just ignore it any longer."
I walked away on a cloud as the gamers were already gathering around. It's just a matter of time. Patience.
Mr. Greenwood said he's heard scuttlebutt that GH will be dropped as the "Core setting" when 4th edition inevitably makes its debut (sorry I never thought to ask when) and that that will be the first move to free GH from the ties that bind it to WOTC and license it out to another company. He said "And they should too, it's too good a setting to just ignore it any longer."
I have a LOT of mixed feelings about this. I don't want new Greyhawk support from a third-party publisher let alone have to wait for a new edition for it.
I don't want new Greyhawk support from a third-party publisher...
Why not? It's pretty clear to me that WotC don't want to support it anymore other than receiving royalty payment to whoever get the license.
If you prefer GH to be dead, then let it stay dead, or simply ignore the new GH products being published by a third party (assuming such a publisher willing to step up).
I guess it's up to the rest of the GH fans.
In all honesty, I've never dealt with a third-party licensing of a favorite setting, and I get weary of what level of quality those publications would be. The feat is most likely a result of that lack of experience with such a situation. I guess I'm just afraid of the unknown.
Edit: PS - It's the combination of third-party publishing and support in a new edition of D&D that bothers me for the most part.
The current position of Wizards of the Coast is that they don't want to license out their settings to third-party publishers. Note that White Wolf just sold Ravenloft back to them.
Unless you know something that I don't, this doesn't necessarily mean that WotC plans on supporting these campaign settings.
Unless you know something that I don't, this doesn't necessarily mean that WotC plans on supporting these campaign settings.
I agree with you.
The current position of Wizards of the Coast is that they don't want to license out their settings to third-party publishers. Note that White Wolf just sold Ravenloft back to them.
Technically, they did not sold the license back. They revert it back. They revert both licenses back voluntarily.
If anything, if WotC can find publishers willing to pay the high royalty payments for their brands, as well as having a reputation for making quality products (a hard lesson learned through the Gamma World license), they will.
But as it stands now, WotC is not interested in reviving another setting line. If there is anything they would want from Ravenloft is some of the trademarked material they can salvage for their D&D CORE products like the upcoming Heroes of Horror book.
Mike
WOTC is shooting themselves in the foot if they don't develop a Greyhawk hardback now IMHO. I'm sure it will sell a lot more copies than other books. The market is there for Living Greyhawk players. I've mentioned this twice to Charles Ryan. I guess they just don't get it OR the ties of the setting to EGG hampers them in some way. What way is beyond me??? I guess they don't want to pay any possible royalities to EGG and just want to pay them to Keith Baker for Eberron now. ACK.
Mike
I don't believe EGG owns any rights to GH. From what I've heard his wife got it all in the divorce and she sold it all to WoTC. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
I agree that a hardback would sell pretty well, but I'm not sure that they'd want to run a huge number for the first printing and that wouldn't be economical for them.
I have a LOT of mixed feelings about this. I don't want new Greyhawk support from a third-party publisher let alone have to wait for a new edition for it.
Like Ranger REG said, just ignore it. No one will make you use it unless your players/DM do of course. I would liken this to the Highlander franchise of movies. The first one was really cool. The sequels have all sucked and you could tell that they were going to suck but we went and saw them anyway. We could have ignored them and just lived with the original. The TV series came along and we figured it would suck too and maybe we did ignore it for a while. But then we watched it and it really wasn't too bad. Where was I going with this? Oh, just don't buy it, maybe flip through it at the store, read our reviews and change your mind if the mood takes you. We're more than a few years away from anything really happening anyway, plenty of time for everything to change.
Erik Mona appears to be swimming upstream in regards to Greyhawk support. WotC is telling him not to use the name 'Greyhawk' in the new adventure path, even though it is obviously set there.
As reported in another thread, WotC is now distancing itself from the idea that Greyhawk is the 'core' setting of D&D. This is obviously a change from the past.
Ed Greenwood has heard 4th edition will remove Greyhawk as the core setting.
I attended a session this GenCon where Dave Arneson said 4th edition would come out 'in a year and a half'. I don't really think he's in a position to know himself, but he might know people who do know.
We've heard recently from WotC "we haven't announced 4th edition and we have no plans to, but if we did we'd give 1 to 2 years notice".
My guess is 4th edition will be announced GenCon 2006, released GenCon 2007.
We've all heard from Charles Ryan that they don't like to fragment the market with too many campaign settings, hence their support of Eberron and FR only. Logically this idea should include third party support of settings as well. If you think too many settings dilute your sales, why would you license out a bunch of settings to other publishers?
So I think Greyhawk support will be dropped entirely, in fact I think its already started. 4th edition might contain some remnants, like spell names, but that's it. In the past, books like the Epic handbook, Deities and Demigods, Arms and Equipment Guide, etc included both Greyhawk and FR specific references, but now that's changed to Eberron and FR.
So, no support from WotC, stealth support from Dungeon, and no third party licensing of Greyhawk. 4th edition in 2 years. That's my guess.
Strange, suddenly I can't wait for 4e.
Both are bad in my book.
Dropping GH and bringing our D&D4e? I don't know which bothers me more.
Both are bad in my book.
IMNSHO, 4e would be the badder business move, because I just recently got around to picking up 3.5e rules.
Besides, I've yet to hear from the majority of GH fan community which version of GH do you want: Gygax's, Sargent's, or Mona's?
So, no support from WotC, stealth support from Dungeon, and no third party licensing of Greyhawk. 4th edition in 2 years. That's my guess.
Gloomy...
IMNSHO, 4e would be the badder business move, because I just recently got around to picking up 3.5e rules.
Besides, I've yet to hear from the majority of GH fan community which version of GH do you want: Gygax's, Sargent's, or Mona's?
Personally, I like all three.
I also was pleased to notice in the interview published by Gamingreport.com that yet another "old" GH adventure would be converted to 3.5E in Dungeon in the near future. Erik sure is doing all he can to support the setting!
During the session erik mentioned that WOTC has discouraged them from mentioning GH City by name or as a location in any adventures.
Just to clarify, we were discouraged from calling the City of Greyhawk "Greyhawk" in the Age of Worms Adventure Path, not in just any random Dungeon adventure. I'm pretty sure I could get away with setting a one-off adventure in Greyhawk, but not a 12-issue campaign meant to be easily portable to any campaign setting.
I'm not sure that changes any of the rest of the stuff mentioned in this post, but in the interest of clarification, I thought I'd mention it.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
... I've yet to hear from the majority of GH fan community which version of GH do you want: Gygax's, Sargent's, or Mona's?
I'll take a 1990s World of Greyhawk as established by Carl Sargent and developed and interpreted by Erik Mona with bits and pieces from the Living Greyhawk campaign (the campaign has done some things right).
Fourth edition D&D so soon? I doubt it. The currently published v.3.5 is teriffic and is the most expansive and playable version of the game. And, regardless of which setting(s) is/are commercially supported, individual campaigns are as Greyhawk as their dungeon masters and players make them.
Happy gaming. :evillaugh
Just to clarify, we were discouraged from calling the City of Greyhawk "Greyhawk" in the Age of Worms Adventure Path, not in just any random Dungeon adventure. I'm pretty sure I could get away with setting a one-off adventure in Greyhawk, but not a 12-issue campaign meant to be easily portable to any campaign setting.
I'm not sure that changes any of the rest of the stuff mentioned in this post, but in the interest of clarification, I thought I'd mention it.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
My bad Erik. Sorry about that. Concussions. Many concussions. I'm lucky I don't drool.
BTW, I can't wait for the Were Rat Catchers Guild Conspiracy adventure set in Greyhawk City.
Mmm.... Lots of undead from Libris Mortis and demons from Fiend Folio!
If a GH license appears on the market and isn't acquired by Gary Gygax, it will be just as much an injustice as when the man's own campaign world was forcibly taken from him in the first place.
I'm not sure what Mr. Gygax's current health situation is or if he could personally direct a re-launch of his creation. That was another query I had for Mr. Greenwood. He said Mr. gygax was limiting his personal appearances after a stroke last year but that he would be seeing him in Toronto sometime this week I guess. I can't remember the name of the event. It'd be cool if he could get it back though wouldn't it? No doubt he would right a lot of changes that were made after he was forced out though, resulting in a whole new look for the setting. Fan boys beware.
My personal preference would be for Paizo to get the license and let Erik and company run with it. This would undoubtedly be the end of Greyhawk in Dungeon for obvious reasons, but I think it would usher in some pretty excellent material.
All pure speculation, but I have come to the conclusion that WotC is rapidly approaching GW market strategy, to pump out as many rulesbooks and rules editions as possible.
To be honest Mr Gygax's version of Greyhawk and what we have now up to LGG is so divergent I don't think they could be compatible really. I think if he had his druthers it would be Greyhawk circa 776 CY and have all generic pseudo 1st edition game mechanics. I am sure some gamers would love it.
Probably true, and I'm not so sure I'd like it. I'd wait to pass judgment on it if and when it comes out.
My personal preference would be for Paizo to get the license and let Erik and company run with it. This would undoubtedly be the end of Greyhawk in Dungeon for obvious reasons, but I think it would usher in some pretty excellent material.
Agreed.
All pure speculation, but I have come to the conclusion that WotC is rapidly approaching GW market strategy, to pump out as many rulesbooks and rules editions as possible.
So it would appear.
Gygax already destroyed his Greyhawk with his last Gord the Rogue novel. :P
How so?
Bocklin, who genuinely does not know anything about GH and is not trying to start a debate, but is asking in all innocence.
The book's epilogue did include with the mention of numerous other worlds however (Erth, Yarth, etc.)
Gygax already destroyed his Greyhawk with his last Gord the Rogue novel. :P
Yes, but in it he also included a clue as to how the world might be restored. ;)
If I remember correctly, the world was literally destroyed by Tharizdun at the end of the book (I'm working on decade-old memory here, however).
The book's epilogue did include with the mention of numerous other worlds however (Erth, Yarth, etc.)
So it's about "literal" destruction!! I thought Amaril meant it as "spoiled" the setting in some way.
Thanks for the explanation.
Bocklin
Yes, but in it he also included a clue as to how the world might be restored. ;)
I must confess I haven't read it. Without spoiling the book for anyone (beyond the obvious destruction of Oerth already mentioned of course) how could it be restored? The destruction of the evil witch and her mercantile empire allies and the restoration of GH City to Xagyg? ;)
Gygax already destroyed his Greyhawk with his last Gord the Rogue novel. :P
Gary left a "back door" open. See:
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?p=408508&highlight=world+open#post408508
Key quote:
"A couple of years back I contacted the WotC book people and suggested a reprint of all seven of the Gord the Rogue books, that being followed by an eighth novel in which the WoG is restored--of course I left that possibility open in the series, what with multiple universes and parrallel worlds, Oerths."
I am glad WOTC didn't bite. Restoring Oerth in this context is just bad literature and it is more like self-motivated publicity since I wager the Oerth wouldn't be restored as is, but would be replaced by the alternate world that he is currently publishing within.
It's one thing when WotC owns the IP. If EGG or an EGG-friendly game company were to reacquire it, it's quite possible he would hit the rewind button to 576 CY and clean up the stuff that was added to Greyhawk after he left TSR in 1985.
This goes for both the Gord series and the Greyhawk campaign world, since each diverged from their origins in different ways.
What if the future of Greyhawk were to fall into the loving hands of Mr. Mona & co. and Paizo. Then, in a quest to satisfy the divergent tastes of Greyhawk fans, there is a two hardcover release.
One, that follows the events of Living Greyhawk to the present GH calender year (CY 591 or whatever). This hardcover would in fact make use of recent Greyhawk history, up to and including some of the Dungeon adventures and the APs.
And then a second hardcover that makes us of an alternate time-line, or an alternate Oerth, if you would, where the year is CY 576. In a perfect world, Mr. Gygax would have creative input in this book. And it would sell like a mother F'er I'm sure.
--V--
I don't want it to be dead. I want to see continued support in the core rule books. I want to see sections in WotC's Monster Manuals that cover X Monster in Greyhawk just as it is for Eberron and FR in MMIII. I want to continue to see the connection of elements of Greyhawk in new supplements put out by Wizards of the Coast. I like the support Greyhawk gets from WotC now. I want more from WotC specifically.
Greyhawk has been dead since E.G. Gygax left TSR and stopped working with it. Jim Ward and some others did a good job giving it life support, but thats been MANY years ago. So honestly this move doesn't surprise me, or really move me either way. If you want good Greyhawk material, look to eBay, 1983 Boxed set, and other modules and material from the old days that give Greyhawk info. I run Greyhawk when I DM, I don't need WOTC writing up endless feats, skills, and silly creatures in order for my setting of choice to have "life". I give it life as a DM.
In all honesty, I've never dealt with a third-party licensing of a favorite setting, and I get weary of what level of quality those publications would be. The feat is most likely a result of that lack of experience with such a situation. I guess I'm just afraid of the unknown.
I'll take the unknown compared to the wet noodle attempt WOTC put in to World of Greyhawk.
I'm hoping whoever picks it up will let Gary write for it again, or put it in the hands of some "old hands" ....
BTW I met Ed Greenwood at GenCon 2004, and I left very unimpressed .. and before you bash me, there are many things I like about FR, including the 2 campaigns I ran in it during my college days and the current OAD&D campaign I play in that is set in it now.
No offense Ed, maybe if it was a different time, circumstances, etc our meeting would have been better. I was basically given the brush off
.. and there wasn't even a line, all I wanted was to give you some praise for creating such a rich setting ... beh.Numenorean
Beregond/DF
And so the battle of the 3 Greyhawks continues...
Hehehe.
BTW I met Ed Greenwood at GenCon 2004, and I left very unimpressed .. and before you bash me, there are many things I like about FR, including the 2 campaigns I ran in it during my college days and the current OAD&D campaign I play in that is set in it now.
No offense Ed, maybe if it was a different time, circumstances, etc our meeting would have been better. I was basically given the brush off
As curious as I am about what transpired between you and Ed, word for word, this is not the forum for it.
As for Gary Gygax, I have yet to see any movement from his camp about wanting to reclaim his Greyhawk IP back. But AFAIK, he's still promoting his ... *chuckles* ... Legendary Adventures line. And don't talk about his other line the Gary Gygax Present series. The only product I have of that line is The Book of Extraordinary Names and it is not written by Gygax himself but Malcolm Bower. Gary Gygax only wrote the Foreword.
Sorry, but my level of adoration and respect for Gygax have gone from god-worship in the past to "Meh, just a decent old game designer."
Here's a thought, and of course it is just a "what if?" for conversation's sake:
What if the future of Greyhawk were to fall into the loving hands of Mr. Mona & co. and Paizo. Then, in a quest to satisfy the divergent tastes of Greyhawk fans, there is a two hardcover release.
One, that follows the events of Living Greyhawk to the present GH calender year (CY 591 or whatever). This hardcover would in fact make use of recent Greyhawk history, up to and including some of the Dungeon adventures and the APs.
And then a second hardcover that makes us of an alternate time-line, or an alternate Oerth, if you would, where the year is CY 576. In a perfect world, Mr. Gygax would have creative input in this book. And it would sell like a mother F'er I'm sure.
--V--
Sorry, but it has to be one or the other. You can't have two different GH campaign settings competing each other. That and you would be splitting the fan community that there will be a civil... war...
Hmm. Not a bad idea at all.
Ahem. It's best to use one setting and one storyline. You may not please all of the GH fans so the best you can hope for is pleasing most of them.
Sorry, but it has to be one or the other. You can't have two different GH campaign settings competing each other. That and you would be splitting the fan community that there will be a civil... war...
Hmm. Not a bad idea at all.
Ahem. It's best to use one setting and one storyline. You may not please all of the GH fans so the best you can hope for is pleasing most of them.
Who says you can't have two different campaign settings in the same campaign setting? (As it were.)
White Wolf did that with the World of Darkness medieval era stuff.
I can easily see Greyhawk accommadating multiple historical eras and locations around the Flanaess.
What is not needed is some weak attempt to eliminate anything and everything written after some point. Declaring FtA or the LGG null and void and trying to "rewind" would not only be a waste of material, but a waste of authors whose material is thrown out with such abandon.
The reverse might not be true, but that is quite likely.
Also if you look at it on that level you should be comparing full cross-line use and sales for companies that make multi-genre games like GURPS and Hero System. They seem to do quite well for themselves.
Of course a really comprehensive sourcebook could probably provide excellent material for a particular part of the Flanaess that would provide ideas for campaigns at multiple periods. The real problem is deciding to take such a different approach to writing and publishing supplements.
Who says you can't have two different campaign settings in the same campaign setting? (As it were.)
White Wolf did that with the World of Darkness medieval era stuff.
I can easily see Greyhawk accommadating multiple historical eras and locations around the Flanaess.
It's being done with Dragonlance also. There's the Dragonlance Campaign Setting, which contains all the basic info for the campaign. There are also the Age of Mortals book, and the War of the Lance book, each detailing a very different period of Krynn's history. Fans were already split on which one they preferred, but you can still accomodate both.
So maybe you can have a Greyhawk Campaign Setting as a base book, then include a sourcebook from before the Greyhawk Wars for people who want to play in that era.
I say give it to Paizo so that they can put out more great adventures like the Istivin series.
Oooh no! I don't think my poor heart could take having Captain Caution and his Nattering Commandos put in charge of Greyhawk's future.
Alternatively, nothing much would likely be changed from where things are now, so it would be more heartburn than heart attack. If a 3rd Party gets the license, I'd like it to be a 3rd Party who will take some chances, who will not simply repeat the past only different, who will swing for the fences and not be content with singles and doubles.
Paizo has kept the flame burning and for that I willingly grant full credit. Paizo has done brilliant work with the four-part map and for that I willingly give them full credit. Cap'n Caution can trade canon with the best of them and for that I give him full credit. I have seen nothing from Cap or Paizo, however, to make me believe they have the creative chops to follow Gygax and Sargent.
I cannot jump aboard the Paizo bandwagon until I see it move. So far, it appears stuck in the mud up to the axels.
GVD (aka "Otto von Bismarck" ::inside joke:: Right, Cap'n? ;) )
This new HB source book needs to have full color maps by Eric Anondson and maps of the biggest/most important cities in each country.
I think Mortellan's campaign would be great myself but I'm biased. :D
Who says you can't have two different campaign settings in the same campaign setting? (As it were.)
White Wolf did that with the World of Darkness medieval era stuff.
I can easily see Greyhawk accommadating multiple historical eras and locations around the Flanaess.
White Wolf can do it because they're not a corporation. Nevertheless, the Dark Ages line seems to be tapering off, and White Wolf is currently consolidating their business to the point of returning the two licenses, moving away from d20 publishing, and probably must make many decision that may include discontinuing certain lines (like they did with the Wraith).
It's being done with Dragonlance also. There's the Dragonlance Campaign Setting, which contains all the basic info for the campaign. There are also the Age of Mortals book, and the War of the Lance book, each detailing a very different period of Krynn's history. Fans were already split on which one they preferred, but you can still accomodate both.
As with my previous statement, Sovereign Press can do so (and by demand from 4th Age fans who does not like the direction 5th Age is going and beyond) because they're not a corporation. They're just focusing on one line, not unlike WotC that is focusing on three (D&D Core, Eberron, and Forgotten Realms) and that is just Dungeons & Dragons (there are others: d20 Modern and Star Wars).
White Wolf can do it because they're not a corporation.
This is honestly...
Wow...
I mean...
Dude.
But then, he might be so starry eyed over the former greats that he's inacpable of making an impact on the setting's overall development. We'll only know when the time for Greyhawk's freedom is upon us and paizo makes a bid..
As with my previous statement, Sovereign Press can do so (and by demand from 4th Age fans who does not like the direction 5th Age is going and beyond) because they're not a corporation. They're just focusing on one line, not unlike WotC that is focusing on three (D&D Core, Eberron, and Forgotten Realms) and that is just Dungeons & Dragons (there are others: d20 Modern and Star Wars).
Sovereign Press is doing more than Dragonlance.
Sovereign Press is doing more than Dragonlance.
Technically, it's Margaret Weis's other company called Margeret Weis Production that is doing Serenity RPG (based on the self-titled film and short-lived TV series, Firefly).
Even then, that's just two lines.
This is honestly...
Wow...
I mean...
Dude.
Let me put it this way, they're a corporation that bow to no one, whereas WotC is a subsidiary of (and bow to) Hasbro.
At GenCon a few years back (okay, the Milwaukee years) a panel of designers was fielding questions and one of them was about 4E. The answer given (Monte Cook?) was that 4E would feature the one-rule formating of the biggest headache in D&D-magic.
If we have to wait for them to break all those little subsystems into a comprehensive mechanic, I think most of us will be living on our IRAs by then.
Oggie
PS-I'll also cast my vote for a GreyHawk HB.
Mona has been working within the framework since he lacks the power to make large sweeping changes to the setting overall. Take away those walls and he may just surprise us.
But whose walls are you referring to, WotC's or the fans' perception of Greyhawk?
Let me put it this way, they're a corporation that bow to no one, whereas WotC is a subsidiary of (and bow to) Hasbro.
Now that makes sense.
My personal preference would be for Paizo to get the license and let Erik and company run with it. This would undoubtedly be the end of Greyhawk in Dungeon for obvious reasons, but I think it would usher in some pretty excellent material.
I have the same preference, and i think Mr Mona also has it. On the other hand, if dungeon is contraigned to cover less and less Greyhawk, i think they may loose some readers. And maybe some of the best scenarii writers motivation.
Really, i can't understand WOTC position. They want to make money, ok, it's quite understandable so : if GH is selling they would publish for it; if it's not selling why don't they sell the licence to a third party?
I don't want to appear as a paranoid fan but wotc is acting like if they absolutely want GH to be absolutely dead (no more support) before to sell it.
To have no regret? to be sure to have converted all old greyhawk players to their new world and to keep the market in hand?
If you have any other explanation taht would explain their behavior with GH thanks!
But whose walls are you referring to, WotC's or the fans' perception of Greyhawk?
Ah, yes, the multi-layered onion...
I would say both factors are at work here, but Wotc's oppression is the heavier of the two. Not that they don't allow for change. Think of Tenh, for example. The whole region's gone, decimated by ethereal marauders, but that was a one-off, just a single page and nothing of well-developed proportions.
But is Mona, working under the Wotc umbrella, dedicated to changing the setting or working within the framework? Age of Worms has world-changing implications, but I suspect it will end well as heroes frequently save the day.
But if Paizo were to get the rights to Greyhawk, then we'd see some classy, well done sourcebooks, cities developed, the outer regions of Oerth charted and developed, and all of it done within the wishes of the great master. I think Mona would hire Gygax as a consultant, and I think Gary would bite.
But that's just me.
Technically, it's Margaret Weis's other company called Margeret Weis Production that is doing Serenity RPG (based on the self-titled film and short-lived TV series, Firefly).
Even then, that's just two lines.
Sovereign Press also does the Sovereign Stone d20 game.
You're right that they don't do as much as WotC. But the fact that WotC has so many lines...
But if Paizo were to get the rights to Greyhawk, then we'd see some classy, well done sourcebooks, cities developed, the outer regions of Oerth charted and developed, and all of it done within the wishes of the great master. I think Mona would hire Gygax as a consultant, and I think Gary would bite.
But that's just me.
That's me, too. I've said it before on the first page of this thread - I whole heartedly support Mona and the rest at Paizo to develop Greyhawk. He has the knowledge, experience and desire. And at Paizo, he has the resources. Dungeon has featured some pretty good Greyhawk adventures.
I am still sceptical about a 4th Edition of D&D. I really cannot see that happening soon, regardless of core or default setting. I think that rumor is just gossip to rankle gamers and incite the simmering internecine flames amongst D&D edition-haters.
Happy gaming.
How about an "Eberon" style contest? Everyone submit their campaign ideas for 10 years of happenings and goings on and have said 3rd party publisher pick the best. Or maybe submit Living Greyhawk material up to whatever year. This wouldn't be too bad but I understand some of the triads have gone a little overboard to outdo each other.
This new HB source book needs to have full color maps by Eric Anondson and maps of the biggest/most important cities in each country.
I think Mortellan's campaign would be great myself but I'm biased. :D
Well there is Woesinger's posted version for the whole Flanaess, and my unposted version for the Sheldomar.
But given that his is about 98% identical to mine for the Sheldomar, I think the two of us could reasonably share things.
So skip the contest, and go with the two people who've already given the concept that degree of thought, and are ready to advance the setting. :D
Sovereign Press also does the Sovereign Stone d20 game.
Not anymore. [url=www.whitesilverpublishing.com
]White Silver Publishing[/url] have taken over and have recently released 3.5e-compatible Sovereign Stone for GenCon Indy 2005.
Not anymore. [url=www.whitesilverpublishing.com
]White Silver Publsihing[/url] have taken over and have recently released 3.5e-compatible Sovereign Stone for GenCon Indy 2005.
Ah. I did not know that.
Well there is Woesinger's posted version for the whole Flanaess, and my unposted version for the Sheldomar. But given that his is about 98% identical to mine for the Sheldomar, I think the two of us could reasonably share things.
You think that was accidental?
On my LGG map, the entire Sheldomar basin is coloured red with a big sticker saying: "Here there be Samwise". :D
As for the 2% variance - you're being completely unreasonable about not renaming Keoland the Principality of Niole Dra. ;)
P.
You think that was accidental?
On my LGG map, the entire Sheldomar basin is coloured red with a big sticker saying: "Here there be Samwise". :D
As for the 2% variance - you're being completely unreasonable about not renaming Keoland the Principality of Niole Dra. ;)
P.
No, no, no.
The Hold of the Sea Princes gets renamed the Principality of Monmurg.
As for other names, blame Gary Holian. He refuses to let me unofficially reorganize the nobility and precedence in the Sheldomar.
Besides, what really needs to be changed is the "United Kingdom of Ahlissa" to "New Keoland."
:D
4th edition? Why?
4th edition? Why?
Why 4th edition? Because Hasbro answers to stockholders.
Why wait until 4th edition to remove Greyhawk as the default "core" setting? Because Greyhawk is so entrenched in the 3rd edition core rulebooks and in most supplements.
But if Paizo were to get the rights to Greyhawk, then we'd see some classy, well done sourcebooks, cities developed, the outer regions of Oerth charted and developed, and all of it done within the wishes of the great master. I think Mona would hire Gygax as a consultant, and I think Gary would bite.
But that's just me.
If Paizo get the rights to GH and immediately went into production, I personally would be disappointed and angry.
Mind you, I have always wanted Paizo to launch a d20 gaming magazine to support non-D&D products including d20 Modern (hey, I'm a d20 gamer, not just a D&D gamer) but their reason for not doing so would be lack of manpower. To launch and maintain a Greyhawk line, even if to put out just 4 products a year, requires manpower.
But that's just me.
Just a disturbing thought.
If Paizo get the rights to GH and immediately went into production, I personally would be disappointed and angry.
Mind you, I have always wanted Paizo to launch a d20 gaming magazine to support non-D&D products including d20 Modern (hey, I'm a d20 gamer, not just a D&D gamer) but their reason for not doing so would be lack of manpower. To launch and maintain a Greyhawk line, even if to put out just 4 products a year, requires manpower.
But that's just me.
Paizo streamlined itself almost overnight after Mona took over, eliminating Polyhedron and Undefeated without even looking back, so I'd say they're in a position to realign their personnel to accomodate such challenges. Besides, that's what freelancers are for; few if any people, save that of the creative elite, draw a steady full-time paycheck from game design, so there would be any number of well-schooled greyhawk writers out there ready to go to bat for Mr. Mona.
But then, that's just the way I see it.
Paizo streamlined itself almost overnight after Mona took over, eliminating Polyhedron and Undefeated without even looking back, so I'd say they're in a position to realign their personnel to accomodate such challenges. Besides, that's what freelancers are for; few if any people, save that of the creative elite, draw a steady full-time paycheck from game design, so there would be any number of well-schooled greyhawk writers out there ready to go to bat for Mr. Mona.
But then, that's just the way I see it.
Good for them, sucks for me. So far, the only magazine I buy from them is Dragon and even then, I have not been enthusiastic as I was when they had those "Campaign Component" articles (from swashbuckler to gladiator).
I swore I would never buy Dungeon after they eliminated Poly, their first attempt at d20 gaming magazine. Prior to that, they also had circulated Star Wars Gamer.
Maybe 4th edition will not only eliminate Greyhawk as the default setting but fantasy as the default genre. Maybe they'll make D20 so neutral that you'd have to buy their fantasy/other settings to play.
Just a disturbing thought.
What exactly is so disturbing about that?
Besides, what really needs to be changed is the "United Kingdom of Ahlissa" to "New Keoland."
:D
Keoland East, surely.
so there would be any number of well-schooled greyhawk writers out there ready to go to bat for Mr. Mona.
Will work for peanuts.
Actually....I am working for peanuts.
Ok - Will work on Greyhawk for peanuts.
What exactly is so disturbing about that?
Uh, well maybe the fact that D&D would essentially cease to exist. As a player I don't want to have to buy two books to play my game. A DM could possibly have to buy four books: the Generic PHB, Fantasy PH Supplement, Generic DM's guide and the Fantasy DM's Supplement. Isn't that the way it works now for third party D20 games? Don't you have to own the WotC's core rule books in order to play say Dragonlance or Sidewinder?Will work for peanuts.
Actually....I am working for peanuts.
Ok - Will work on Greyhawk for peanuts.
I bet there's a ton of guys that wold do this for free...at least for a little while. It'd get your foot in the door.
Yeah, it's basically no longer the fantasy role-playing game known as Dungeons & Dragons if the elements of medieval fantasy are removed. Then you're just left with the SRD.
. . . few if any people, save that of the creative elite, draw a steady full-time paycheck from game design . . .
But then, that's just the way I see it.
Ah, the "creative elite." Those employed full-time to prepare gaming products for the creatively challenged. You see them tooling around town in their Italian sports cars to pick up their hot girlfriends from an Elle or Playboy photoshoot. Then its off to a weekend in the Hamptons where they rub shoulders with the avante gard or maybe they are habitues of the VIP section of the the Ghost Bar, if they haven't already opened their own ultra lounge (quietly, of course, investing through a front company in the Cayman Islands, where they also bank). ::sigh:: Those "creative elite." ::swoon:: They are the idols of the unwashed mass of creatively inferior gamers. Only downside are the paparazzi who speard the exploits of the "creative elite" all over the tabloids and E. But at least then we can dream, living vicariously, imaging their glamourous lives behind the gates of their palatial mansions. Releaves our lives of quiet desperation trying to come up with a decent adventure of plot hook. Thank god for the creative elite!
Ah, the "creative elite." Those employed full-time to prepare gaming products for the creatively challenged. You see them tooling around town in their Italian sports cars to pick up their hot girlfriends from an Elle or Playboy photoshoot. Then its off to a weekend in the Hamptons where they rub shoulders with the avante gard or maybe they are habitues of the VIP section of the the Ghost Bar, if they haven't already opened their own ultra lounge (quietly, of course, investing through a front company in the Cayman Islands, where they also bank). ::sigh:: Those "creative elite." ::swoon:: They are the idols of the unwashed mass of creatively inferior gamers. Only downside are the paparazzi who speard the exploits of the "creative elite" all over the tabloids and E. But at least then we can dream, living vicariously, imaging their glamourous lives behind the gates of their palatial mansions. Releaves our lives of quiet desperation trying to come up with a decent adventure of plot hook. Thank god for the creative elite!
Gee, that didn't sound bitter at all.
Gee, that didn't sound bitter at all.
See. I'm not only "unwashed" by unchurched too. :P Light a votive candle for me won't you?
See. I'm not only "unwashed" by unchurched too. :P Light a votive candle for me won't you?
Nah, I'll just ignore you like I usually do. :P
What exactly is so disturbing about that?
Because that would be a very BAD business decision for WotC. Let's face it, of the three main RPG product brands (one is licensed), Dungeons & Dragons is their #1 hot-seller. It's the very reason WotC bought TSR in the first place.
To diminish something like that is like taking away the naked pictures out of Playboy magazine (for you grrl gamers, Playgirl). :P
If WotC is savvy enough (like wait until 2009 to begin designing 4e, for example), D&D shall remain their d20 System flagship product.
I ask again, what's so disturbing about that? If you don't like it, don't play it. Older editions still exist now, so 3.5 will continue to exist in the future.
Because that would be a very BAD business decision for WotC. Let's face it, of the three main RPG product brands (one is licensed), Dungeons & Dragons is their #1 hot-seller. It's the very reason WotC bought TSR in the first place.
Well, that may very well be a consequence, but I'd hardly call that disturbing. I have no investment in how WotC does as a company. If no one ever published another D&D product ever again, my life would go on (and it would still include playing D&D... and it would also include Greyhawk, and Dragonlance, etc, etc).
Not only that, remember what Monte Cook said about 3.5, that WotC began planning for it as soon as 3E was released.
As long as they don't intend to try and design a completely new system, the only question about 4E is not when they begin to design it, but when they release it.
Indeed, given the lead time on products like this it would be very bad if they weren't already working on 4E. One year for layout and content decisions and one year for playtesting and editing are a minimum for a quality product.
Also, despite complaints otherwise, going more than five years between editions is excessively long. Only D&D has managed to thrive on such a schedule. GURPS is on its 4th edition (since 1986), and Call of Cthulu is on its 6th (since 1981). D&D is hardly any more perfect that it shouldn't be heading into a 4th (more correctly, a 6th) edition in 2006 or 2007. And indeed, with the rather weak level of playtesting and design standards that seem to be turning into the norm ("Throw more power at it!"), the stability of the system calls for more regular overhauls.
While my wallet won't be happy (and given the current release schedule it already isn't), I'll be more concerned about finding another 10' of space to store another set of obsolete books.
Aug, 2005 - Aug, 2006 - Mike Mearls finalizes and polishes the 4E work that has been going on since 3.5 debuted.
Aug, 2006 - Aug, 2007 - Playtesting takes place.
Gencon 2007 - 4E is announced.
Aug, 2007 - Aug 2008 - Final tweaks and inevitable "Countdown."
Gencon 2008 - 4E debuts
4E will not be called Dungeons & Dragons, 4th Edition. There will be two versions. There will be a D&D, Basic Edition, which will combine in one book a PH with substantial elements of the DMG and MM and covering play from 1st to 10th Level. There will also be D&D, Advanced Edition, which will cover 1st to 20th level and will release a PH, DMG and MM etc. The Basic Edition and the PH for the Advanced Edition will debut at Gencon 2008.
The Basic and Advanced Editions will not be subject to the OGL but Wotc will have a licensing arrangement called OGL II. It will, however, be a more typical license, not truly open.
By my completely unscientific estimate -
Aug, 2005 - Aug, 2006 - Mike Mearls finalizes and polishes the 4E work that has been going on since 3.5 debuted.
Aug, 2006 - Aug, 2007 - Playtesting takes place.
Gencon 2007 - 4E is announced.
Aug, 2007 - Aug 2008 - Final tweaks and inevitable "Countdown."
Gencon 2008 - 4E debuts
4E will not be called Dungeons & Dragons, 4th Edition. There will be two versions. There will be a D&D, Basic Edition, which will combine in one book a PH with substantial elements of the DMG and MM and covering play from 1st to 10th Level. There will also be D&D, Advanced Edition, which will cover 1st to 20th level and will release a PH, DMG and MM etc. The Basic Edition and the PH for the Advanced Edition will debut at Gencon 2008.
The Basic and Advanced Editions will not be subject to the OGL but Wotc will have a licensing arrangement called OGL II. It will, however, be a more typical license, not truly open.
By my completely unscientific estimate -
The Basic and Advanced Editions will not be subject to the OGL but Wotc will have a licensing arrangement called OGL II. It will, however, be a more typical license, not truly open.
Heh. Very unscientific, alright. If OGL v.2.0 is the worst reform of the license, at least we have v.1.0a to fall back on.
So it's about "literal" destruction!! I thought Amaril meant it as "spoiled" the setting in some way.
Nah, the first book accomplished that.
I would love to see lands beyond the mountians and deserts. I read some were there is a Dragon kingdom, a oriental land land ruled by orcs and it sounds real cool but they do not expand and you can only do so much in one area. they did it for FR which we found out about other lands and peoples. vbut why not Greyhawk, I love this world and will hate to see it go. Everybody have to remeber that all this is just a rumor and they probly aint going to have a 4th ed until another10 15 years, if they did i will get read of my 3rd ed stuff and go back and play1st/2nd game!
We dod not now why ravenloft revert back to Wizards nor do we no way dragonlance is still going. personally some publishers did do a excellent job. WW did a good job on Ravenloft, and dragonlance is doing very will with SS.
WotC is already designing 4E. Look at the new NPC template that showed up in the DMG II.
Not only that, remember what Monte Cook said about 3.5, that WotC began planning for it as soon as 3E was released.
As long as they don't intend to try and design a completely new system, the only question about 4E is not when they begin to design it, but when they release it.
Personally, I think the D&D Online game will be an indicator for directions. If it runs well, and more people get into D&D 3.5, I don't think they'll change the rule -system too fast. If the game flops, we may see a new edition sooner...
If it runs well, and more people get into D&D 3.5,...
I doubt it. Why would a videogamer be interested in the pen-n-paper number-crunching version of an electronic game when the game itself take care of all the calculations?
'The D&D license has been sold. 4th edition has been cancelled.'
I doubt it. Why would a videogamer be interested in the pen-n-paper number-crunching version of an electronic game when the game itself take care of all the calculations?
From what I've heard, I figure this game was also done the way it was to make Eberron more popluar. Now, since E is written for 3.5, I can't figure they would shoot themselves in the foot that way... Also, an indication may also be that d20 is flourishing, many prestigeous projects are still scheduled for 2007. (I just can't believe we will see DA 5 on GenCon then together with a new edition that makes the book useless for all who play the new rules. ;) )
Besides, here's a link on the next projects by WotC:
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=141849
Besides, we diiscussed this over at the FoS (here: http://www.fraternityofshadows.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2430&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15)
And this is what came out:
8 years after 3.0 came out and less than 5 since 3.5.
There is no was they'll go for another separate edition that soon. A republishing of the Core books maybe, one to accommodate all the new information featuring a wave of new feats, PrC, and the like as well as accommodating errata and rule clarifications. But a whole new edition?
The fans would never stand for it. No one wants to buy a whole new set of books and re-do everything again. For the long-time fans (the adult players and those with the income to buy every book and thus carry the company) they'll most likely have sat through one edition chance already. Two if you can the swap-over to 3.5. And I don’t think WotC has forgotten the stinging of that, a lot of fuss and negative publicity spun out of that and drove a lot of fans to the competitors. Their share of the market really slid over 2003-04.
WotC will have to wait another few years for a generation to grow up who has only played 3/3.5 who will be willing to get in at the ground floor. It's daunting to 'have' to pick up ten-twenty accessory books. Fans and hobbyists do tend to favour the collector “gotta have ‘em all” mentality. That’s easier when you can pick them up as they’re released but gets hard when there’s a big back catalogue.
As it stands more people lean on the “getting them all since day-one” category than the “just started and have a ways to go”.
Remember AD&D 2E came out in ’87. It was 13 years before they squeaked out 3E. There’s still plenty of books that can be released or revamped. The monster books still have a long way to go and there are numerous races and environments still to be covered and detailed. To say nothing of the setting-specific books such as the Eberron and Forgotten Realms series.
IF they do release a new edition it’ll likely be an alternate rule-set for either advanced or beginning players. Rather like they had D&D and AD&D for a time.
So, we probably we have to wait for 5 - 6 more years. According to the Wizards publishing a book every month, that will be 60 - 70 more general rulebooks.
While I can see FR taking 60 more books I can't see how the Wizards will pull it off so much with Eberon or general D&D books. Or I can't imagine anyone buying 30 (not 60) more books of FR!
Probably WotC will slow down eventually to quality instead of quantity.
...
Basically, here's what I found rumouring about 4e:
(Please keep in mind: THESE are just RUMOURS, nothing approved!)
- Both FR and Greyhawk will be dropped.
- WotC will again try to acquire licenses for fantasy settings from popular novels, such as CoC or WoT... Harry Potter d20 could be reality soon...
- d20 will go on.
Best wishes from the outer planes,
R
Lots of rumours, lots of speculation, but some things sounded quite convincing to me...
Mr. Greenwood said he's heard scuttlebutt that GH will be dropped as the "Core setting" when 4th edition inevitably makes its debut (sorry I never thought to ask when) and that that will be the first move to free GH from the ties that bind it to WOTC and license it out to another company.
This is, by far, the best rumour I've ever started.
This is, by far, the best rumour I've ever started.
And just WTF is that supposed to mean?
This is, by far, the best rumour I've ever started.
Bah. I am Spartacus.
I don't believe EGG owns any rights to GH. From what I've heard his wife got it all in the divorce and she sold it all to WoTC. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
I haven't spoken to Gary personally, but i have seen posts on forums by him, in which he says that basically the world of Greyhakw died in his Greyhawk novels, but he did leave a clue on how it could be "reborn." As for who owns the copyrights/royalties to the old TSR products/gameworlds . . . to quote one of Gary's own posts . . . . (on a different forum site)
In my settlement and separation from TSR all those rights were signed over to them for deravitve works as they defined them. 2E was by that definition a derivative, so other that a straight reprint of OAD&D falls into that category.
The short answer is no :heh:
Cheers,
Gary
For those of you who are longtime WoG fans, and know the world as well as Gary does, there are a few forums where he posts regularly, and is more than willing to answer questions about the world _he_ created. Just stay away from the "what system do you think is better" stuff, he'll just comment that he's in no place to say.
If a GH license appears on the market and isn't acquired by Gary Gygax, it will be just as much an injustice as when the man's own campaign world was forcibly taken from him in the first place.
Probably the most truthful remark i've ever seen on a forum.
I'm not sure what Mr. Gygax's current health situation is or if he could personally direct a re-launch of his creation. That was another query I had for Mr. Greenwood. He said Mr. gygax was limiting his personal appearances after a stroke last year but that he would be seeing him in Toronto sometime this week I guess. I can't remember the name of the event. It'd be cool if he could get it back though wouldn't it? No doubt he would right a lot of changes that were made after he was forced out though, resulting in a whole new look for the setting. Fan boys beware.
Again I point out that the "Gygaxian" WoG was destroyed in the Gord series of novels.
I am glad WOTC didn't bite. Restoring Oerth in this context is just bad literature and it is more like self-motivated publicity since I wager the Oerth wouldn't be restored as is, but would be replaced by the alternate world that he is currently publishing within.
As for the personal snipe towards Gary . . . shame on you. Gary has been publishing game material ever since he first created both OD&D _and_ the WoG. Even when T$R tried to take him to court so they could prevent him from creating anymore game systems, he still laughed at them. His newest game system, while closer to the OAD&D system, is based on a parallel universe of Earth.
B/S he's still producing material for _his_ world, and let's face it folks . . . it is his, T$R may have stolen the name when they booted him out (I've always wondered how one gets fired from a company you created) and kept the WoG copyright, but a rose by any other name . . .
1. Mr Gygax' health should be beyond any speculation, not only in this thread, but in general. He has declared on several occasions that he is doing well and that we won't have to expect him to withdraw from writing, or, less polite, to die soon.
2. Mr Gygax original gaming world and today's Greyhawk share as much as Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance - which isn't bad, really, but, I think to expect Mr Gygax to *clean up* the works of later designers is not very probable.
3. While one may argue that Mr Gygax' newest publications are kind of a sell-out, he gives the Hawkers what they have always demanded. That he can't declare his CZ an official Greyhawk supplement, may anger him maybe as much as it amgers some of us.
4. From what I get, the main reason for Mr Gygax' alliance with TLG is that they share the same passion for oldschool oriented gaming and that the Trolls' new game system is perfectly usable for his kind of design. He certainly doesn't do it because *Erde* would be his new pet.
5. What (if ever) would be one way of Greyhawk resurrected: LG ends, or comes to a point with overall stability --> the RPGA decides to put out more supplements to back their campaign. Although I respect of the work done there, but I am really not sure how the new version of the Flanaess would match with the picture I have based on my stone-old supplements. It might be a great campaign world, this supposedly new Greyhawk, but really, I doubt that it will be MY Greyhawk any longer.
Just my two cents...
The characters that 'died', were reborn, slightly different, but reborn on another world, and new universe.
This is what I remember, but feel free to make corrections. But this, is what I remembered.
As for the personal snipe towards Gary . . . shame on you. Gary has been publishing game material ever since he first created both OD&D _and_ the WoG. Even when T$R tried to take him to court so they could prevent him from creating anymore game systems, he still laughed at them. His newest game system, while closer to the OAD&D system, is based on a parallel universe of Earth.
Perhaps if he stops playing with his Lejendary Adventures line and start making more d20 products (in addition to the Gary Gygax Presents series), I might see him in a positive light.
Besides, I stopped idol-worshipping him a long time ago. He's not the only one that created Dungeons & Dragons.
B/S he's still producing material for _his_ world, and let's face it folks . . . it is his, T$R may have stolen the name when they booted him out (I've always wondered how one gets fired from a company you created) and kept the WoG copyright, but a rose by any other name . . .
The way I heard it, he resigned from the company. Or "forced to" if you prefer to add that to my previous statement.
Gary has made it quite clear that the World of Greyhawk he published was neither the same as his home campaign, nor intended to be developed beyond what was published in the 83 set. The setting was to be developed by individual DMs beyond that point.
If we are to take him at face value on that statement, then absolutely no purpose would be served by him getting a license for Greyhawk. There would be nothing for him to publish on it beyond a game system revision of the previously published materials. That would be absolutely useless to the vast majority of Greyhawk fans, even those who would like to convert it to a new system as the amount of relevant material in the 83 books that would be affected by such a change is less than a page.
He has also made it quite clear that he has a new game system and a new campaign to design and develop material for, and that he has no interest in developing Greyhawk further. Again, taking him at face value on that statement would mean that even less purpose would be served in having him gain the license just to do nothing with it.
Either way, Gary has no interest in such a license, so why be eager for him to get it?
He's said he doesn't want it, that he has his own game to develop, and that Greyhawk was "finished" when published. The only reason to then want him to have it is to see all Greyhawk development stopped. I don't want to see that at all, and so I'd rather not see Gary get the license for Greyhawk. Whatever may have happened in the past, happenend in the past. WotC didn't steal anything from anyone, and the legions of Greyhawk fans most certainly didn't steal anything either. If some of us want to see it continue to be developed then we should be able to look for someone who will do just that to get the license. That is what I want to see, someone interested in developing Greyhawk getting the license.
Look on the bright side. At least Dungeons & Dragon co-creator Dave Arneson gave the greenlight to make his own campaign, Blackmoor -- before it got assimilated into the Greyhawk campaign publication -- published for the d20 System.
DABM is the perfect example that such an experiment can work out marvellously. One of the best settings I've ever seen... But maybe my opinion is not so reliable, as I am known as one BIG Blackmoor fanboy out there...
Check out the latest Dragon write-up on Iggwilv. If that's the future of Greyhawk, I'm more than content.
Vengeance is one of those people who doesn't want to see any Greyhawk development.
Well lots of us do want to see Greyhawk development. We happen to like the setting so much we want to see it supported and expanded. And I for one am glad that the real fans of the setting just won't let it die no matter what.
So there it is.
Vengeance is one of those people who doesn't want to see any Greyhawk development.
Well lots of us do want to see Greyhawk development. We happen to like the setting so much we want to see it supported and expanded. And I for one am glad that the real fans of the setting just won't let it die no matter what.
Here, here...
So there it is.
Vengeance is one of those people who doesn't want to see any Greyhawk development.
Well lots of us do want to see Greyhawk development. We happen to like the setting so much we want to see it supported and expanded. And I for one am glad that the real fans of the setting just won't let it die no matter what.
Be careful what you wish for Sam. There have been too many chiefs in the kitchen already and not all followers of Greyhawk find these chiefs creations palatable. Besides, it's been Greyhawk's lack of overly specific detail that has attracted many players and DM's alike, allowing them to create without severely contridicting "official" sources. The more official sources, the less freedom of imagination for individual campaigns. Maybe its better to leave well enough alone.
heh, all the BS I've seen both on this thread, and many others makes me proud to be one of the many that still refuse to play the bastardized, powergamer glorifiying, twink friendly, _crap_ that WOTChas labeled an RPG. The new system supports role-playing about as much as Magic did . . . it's more akin to the PC/platform games that have been released under the guise of RPG, when they are little more that adventure games that allowed you a bit more character customization and interaction with the surrounding world/ inhabitants.
Meh.
I like the improvement that they made for D&D over previous edition. You want to ride a horse, you can develop and train your skill, even if you're a natural-born klutz. In previous edition, no klutz would be caught riding a horse, rather they hitch a ride on a wagon.
Elf paladin? It was taboo in previous editions (like girls showing their bare ankles back in the hey-days).
And what's the deal with having two multiclassing systems? Humans aren't that special. (I'm anti-humaniti in real life.)
You want to argue with me about the previous editions rules, fine with me. Don't cry if I "steal your thunder."
Summer 2007 - The edition will have run its course and young gamer and grognard alike will travel to Gencon for the inevitable announcement of D&D 4e. The grand auditorium will fill up quickly, like so many clowns packing themselves into a tiny volkswagon, and the room will fall silent as Mike Mearls ascends the stage for what will be remembered as his pivotal moment in gaming history. The mike will carry the sound of his long, heavy breathing throughout the room as every player sits on the edge of his seat waiting for the words that will give his life purpose for the next five years. Mearls will have no papers in hand, will carry nothing, in fact, and that will heighten the sense of excitement in the room. 'He must be carrying the speech in his head,' they will whisper feverishly to one another. And then, at the point of anticipation, Mearls will finally speak to the nachos saturated crowd, saying...
'The D&D license has been sold. 4th edition has been cancelled.'
Bravo, sir.
heh, all the BS I've seen both on this thread, and many others makes me proud to be one of the many that still refuse to play the bastardized, powergamer glorifiying, twink friendly, _crap_ that WOTChas labeled an RPG. The new system supports role-playing about as much as Magic did . . . it's more akin to the PC/platform games that have been released under the guise of RPG, when they are little more that adventure games that allowed you a bit more character customization and interaction with the surrounding world/ inhabitants.
I think 3.X allows for just as much roleplaying as the other editions. I play in a group that uses a mesh of 3.0/3.5 rules in a greyhawk campaign. As recently as a month ago we had two 6 1/2 hour sessions with no combat. We celebrated Brewfest, my character set up an archery contest using the rules from the Complete Warrior. We all interacted with the local festivities. It was great and the only dice rolled were for the archery contest, the pie baking contest, the pie eating contest and of course a slew of Constitution checks to see if we could hold our brew.
The 3.X system allows for as much roleplaying as any good DM will introduce into the campaign and the rules system IMO is easier and more clear than earlier editions.
Be careful what you wish for Sam. There have been too many chiefs in the kitchen already and not all followers of Greyhawk find these chiefs creations palatable. Besides, it's been Greyhawk's lack of overly specific detail that has attracted many players and DM's alike, allowing them to create without severely contridicting "official" sources. The more official sources, the less freedom of imagination for individual campaigns. Maybe its better to leave well enough alone.
So what?
While that certainly sounds quite convincing, on closer examination both are revealed as totally irrelevant.
First, as to those developers whose work may have been less than wonderful, two solutions to that present themselves quite readily. The first is to work around their material, adroitly reconfiguring it into something more enjoyable. The second is to declare it void in as minimal a manner as possible, removing only the most egregious errors. Both are aided by the exceptionally simple technique of declaring all previous material to have been written "in-character" by biased world setting authors. A very simple, and background founded, solution.
Second, as to people liking to develop their own material, that is exploded by the essential concept of a published world setting. Quite simply, if you want to create your own setting you will do so from start to finish, and not even bother with purchasing a base world setting. Further, even if you just desire a few starting ideas, it becomes a basic question of whether or not you are a customer. If you are, then it doesn't matter how the setting is developed, you will purchase the materials for inspiration and use them wholly or in part as you desire. If you are not a customer, then it doesn't matter how the setting is developed, you won't purchase anything, or use it wholly or in part. Either way, the course of the development is going to be purely incidental. (The quality of course remains relevant, but only to actual customers.)
So in the long run, neither point is of any relevance.
So we get a few developers of poor quality? It happens. I am not overly thrilled with everything published for Greyhawk. As long as we also get a few of high quality to overturn their "contributions" it will work out in the long run.
And so not everything is of use to every single person because of individual campaign divergence. As long as their is a growing setting, in-print and available for new gamers, there will always be people able to use everything as published as it comes out.
Oh, and it has not been Greyhawk's lack of detail that has attracted most people. Rather it has been the extensive detail added by a very small group of fans that has attracted most people. When people start discussing the lack of detail, they inevitably wind up with either massive flame wars or long winded backslapping, neither of which encourages people to play. Instead it is when they come across those web sites where people have posted the detailed development they have added to the setting that new players see just how much fun the setting can be. Providing this detail in published products would attract even more players to the setting.
Oh, and it has not been Greyhawk's lack of detail that has attracted most people.
I too believe this to be a common myth that has little or no basis in fact. That it is repeated so often does not make it so, particularly when it is often repeated by a group of Greyhawk "fans" that, when pushed, admit to wanting nothing more produced for Greyhawk. They are Greyhawk "dead-enders." That want Greyhawk under glass, preserved as if for a museum.
It is not a "lack of detail" that has given Greyhawk an enduring popularity but rather a type of detail that rewards more than a casual aquaintance. The best Greyhawk details suggest as many questions as they answer. This is distinct from many other settings that present facts that all but "close the book" on the topic under consideration or at least show no curiousity beyond the recitation.
This factor also puts the lie to claims that Greyhawk fans are quarrelsome. No. Greyhawk fans are engaging a setting that is more open to engagement in a variety of ways and means. What some see as "quarrelsome" is better viewed as vitality. Few other settings have as vibrant a fan community as Greyhawk, most boasting a "Yeah, I love it too. Wasn't it neat when X said to Y . . ." interaction.
The resistence to Greyhawk evidenced by the IP holders is (1) one part caution, as other settings have done well, (2) one part confusion, as Greyhawk does not so easily lend itself to easy success by means of trowlling out just anything and affixing a Greyhawk label, and (3) one part trepidation, as Greyhawk fans have failed to master Pavlov's trick as well as the fans of some other settings.
Greyhawk is not the only good setting available. I believe it is by far the most challenging and the most rewarding then to those not looking to have all the answers handed to them.
(3) one part trepidation, as Greyhawk fans have failed to master Pavlov's trick as well as the fans of some other settings.
haha! that line struck me funny, can't really add to that. just thought i'd highlight it ;)
He [Greenwood] said "...I'm a big Greyhawk fan myself. You must remember that when I started playing Greyhawk was the only setting we had. I get excited when I see new Greyhawk products."
Every time I think of this, I'm reminded of the sage words of Cleveland, "Oh, Peter, that tickles me in a way that if Loretta tickled me in that way, I'd say, 'Oh yeah...that's nice... that's the spot.'"
Be careful what you wish for Sam. There have been too many chiefs in the kitchen already and not all followers of Greyhawk find these chiefs creations palatable. Besides, it's been Greyhawk's lack of overly specific detail that has attracted many players and DM's alike, allowing them to create without severely contridicting "official" sources. The more official sources, the less freedom of imagination for individual campaigns. Maybe its better to leave well enough alone.
Personally, I don't give a rip about somebody else's spin on Greyhawk. I just want the foundation. The map. The details of locations and cultures of interest, the notable figures with or without stats (preferred without; just suggested guidance like "dwarf fighter 7/cleric 4," period). And a timeline from origin to present-day.
And to feel like I can immersed in that world, I like crucial fluff like how they behave, how they greet each other, what are the names of the military unit, personnel positions, and ranks, how do I start up a business, how do get an audience with an overlord, etc. Screw the crunch. What matters to me is to get into the roleplaying part, and every bit of information would help.
Like with Peter Jackson's LOTR. There are some wardrobe that are not visible in the scene that the actors know and because by wearing it underneath, they get into character more at ease. In order for me to play a native denizen of Greyhawk, I want to know what a native think. What makes him tick?
That's all I want. And illustrations help, too. After all, I do collect them Osprey books.
Personally, I don't give a rip about somebody else's spin on Greyhawk. I just want the foundation. The map. The details of locations and cultures of interest, the notable
That's all I want. And illustrations help, too. After all, I do collect them Osprey books.
Largely, I agree with you. I'm about to start my own GH campaign, CY 576, using the '83 boxed set as the principal resource. Everything else I will utilize will be done on a case by case basis. Now, it just so happens that since I am going to run the Shackled City AP, which is geographically right at the border of the Hellfurnaces and the Amedio Jungle, I 've been looking into the resources as they relate to this area. Interestingly enough, some of the finest write-ups on the Olman -- history, culture, etc -- have been recently submitted by fans such as GVD at Canonfire.com.
Granted I may not agree with GVD's every assessment, but I applaud his efforts in expanding one little corner of the GH world for us all. He also exposes a lot of the faultiness on the Olman as presented by S. Reynolds in Scarlet Brotherhood using The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan as the root and basis for his arguments.
Now, then, how much of this will I actually use in my game? Probably not much, but it's cool to have a working knowledge of something so that when the unexpected occurs in-game, you as DM, are ripe with knowledge as opposed to making up everything on the fly -- which can sometimes be brilliant, other times contrived.
Beer!
--Ghul
I don't think that a single DM out there will deny that without establishing "house rules" pertaining to what races may choose what classes, or even what Feats may be chosen from the various official rulebooks, there is the undeniable fact that there are players out there who will try to min/max their character to get the best possible feats/saves/skills/powers at the least amount of cost.
Now I also understand that these types of players, while not in as much of an abundance as they are today, have been around as long as this genre of gaming has been. But with the older systems, these twinks have been severely limited towards what they could possibnly do, and when they tried, the DM was able to recognise their attempts before they became a problem.
The point I'm effectively trying to make is that, while the new system allows a lot more of the "free-form" gaming style, by doing so, it opens up more doors that allow for it's abuse.
P.S. I would love to see EGG take up the banner of TWoG once again, and I've got no problem if it was under the d20 system. But I personally feel that even if he did so, we would see a lot of the older systems' restrictions be incorporated into the setting's structure, if for no other reason than to preserve the origianl feeling of the world.
As a side-note, those of you who feel that EGG is noting but a money-loving mongrel, please take out the spells with the name Mordikainen and Bigby, for these were actually characters run by this same mongrel, and without the adventures he played through, these spells would not exist.
So, to sumarize. I agree with the basis of the new system, but realise the neccessity of making house rules to restrict the abuse of these same rules.
But I personally feel that even if he did so, we would see a lot of the older systems' restrictions be incorporated into the setting's structure, if for no other reason than to preserve the origianl feeling of the world.
Heavenly! Lord knows that no campaign I run will ever feature anything as ludacrous as a dwarf wizard or an elf paladin.
P.S. I would love to see EGG take up the banner of TWoG once again, and I've got no problem if it was under the d20 system. But I personally feel that even if he did so, we would see a lot of the older systems' restrictions be incorporated into the setting's structure, if for no other reason than to preserve the origianl feeling of the world.
As a side-note, those of you who feel that EGG is noting but a money-loving mongrel, please take out the spells with the name Mordikainen and Bigby, for these were actually characters run by this same mongrel, and without the adventures he played through, these spells would not exist.
What exactly of the old system's original feeling is not preserved now?
Are you seriously asserting that role-playing is somehow impossible or impaired if people can play dwarven wizards?
I would note that many race and class combinations were not possible in the original Player's Handbook but were added in Unearthed Arcana, not to mention the shift from the demi-human races originally being classes just by themselves, or the repeated NPCs with class combinations and character levels supposedly not possible under the basic rules.
In light of that, suggesting that the "flavor" is somehow lost because someone runs around with a half-orc paladin seems rather weak.
And as a side-note, you seem to be the only person calling anyone anything of that sort. So perhaps you should start by redacting your books in that manner.
In light of that, suggesting that the "flavor" is somehow lost because someone runs around with a half-orc paladin seems rather weak.
I totally agree with you Samwise. To me it is about the roleplay and what better challenge would there be then to roleplay a half-orc paladin? Dwarf wizards, I see no reason why not, infact, everyone has some magic item in their game that was made by dwarves. How were those made if not by wizards? Not ever magic item can be made clerics.
I will let my players run any combo they like (provided it is not a broken class, feat, etc), all they have to justify it to me how it will roleplay.
I think really there is no right or wrong way to play D&D. If you works for you, then all the power to you. The only hard and fast "guideline" I use is it has to be in the "spirit" of the game and the intentions of the developers.
White Wolf can do it because they're not a corporation.
Completely off topic, but what do you mean they're not a corporation? Are they a collective? Family business? Feel free to PM me, if you don't want to reply in thread, anybody who knows.
Completely off topic, but what do you mean they're not a corporation? Are they a collective? Family business? Feel free to PM me, if you don't want to reply in thread, anybody who knows.
Already answered:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7073530&postcount=63
In a recent posting to his blog, Erik mentions one of his current projects:
"The Wizards of the Coast Hardcover I Was Born to Write
I won't say what it is, but I will say it's a collaboration with James Jacobs and Ed Stark. It's going to be the bestest, and will probably be my last non-magazine professional game credit in a while. I'm itching to move into other mediums and genres, and plan to take a little extra-curricular gaming sabbatical for a while after this one, which will encompass about 50,000 words of text. Status: On schedule."
Could this possibly be a new Greyhawk hardcover?
Link
Could this possibly be a new Greyhawk hardcover?
Nope! It's Hordes of the Abyss.
Nope! It's Hordes of the Abyss.
Damn.
http://www.superunicorn.com/erik/2005/09/current-obsessions.html#c112625186067521894
I remember way back when I first got involved with online Greyhawk that this (lower planar stuff) was one of Erik's projects. It will be nice to see what it looks like.
I accept that there was little interest expressed in moving the timeline forward substantially, and yes, this was perecived as thh role of the DM. What EGG appeared to be considering was adding ad-hoc flavour in the form of developping some of his campaign experiences into print. The nature of this, to me , proved to be a frustrating element at the time. I wanted to know more detail about the machinations of Tharizdun, Greyhawk Wars etc. and the existing campaign showed little evidence of providing a coherant storyline for this,whilst always hinting that one was 'under the surface'.
That it was moved on by Sargent in directions that didn't wholly embrace what had gone before, not to mention the aberration that the setting became between EGG and Sargent did not help define GH IMHO.
Of all the submissions on this subject, I am still most impressed with that made by Eric Mona, when it was floated that GH hardcovers could look different time settings, from the Invoked Devastation, to 579, to the Wars and beyond, exploring the campaign themes in a way that this setting has always cried out for. That it might encompass design input from some of the old hands as well as existing talent would be a bonus!
The only thing I need is a good scenario. And I mean aGOOD one with lots of information such as monster statistics, floorplans, layouts of villages and cities and boxed texts easy to introduce in the game. You know the kind of scenario a DM can sit back and start reading aloud without having to spend days and days of preparation and consulting all those role-playing aids with information you don't seem to find whenever you need it.
A good story can fit into any world. You change a few names and it doesn't matter anymore if your characters live in Greyhawk, the Forgotten Realms or on Pluto.
Greetings and happy gaming.
I think 3.X allows for just as much roleplaying as the other editions. I play in a group that uses a mesh of 3.0/3.5 rules in a greyhawk campaign. As recently as a month ago we had two 6 1/2 hour sessions with no combat. We celebrated Brewfest, my character set up an archery contest using the rules from the Complete Warrior. We all interacted with the local festivities. It was great and the only dice rolled were for the archery contest, the pie baking contest, the pie eating contest and of course a slew of Constitution checks to see if we could hold our brew.
The 3.X system allows for as much roleplaying as any good DM will introduce into the campaign and the rules system IMO is easier and more clear than earlier editions.
Scoti,
IMO, I believe you illustrate the opposite point. You see, my experience running this system the past 5 1/2 years is this: as the characters ascend in levels, particularly post L10, the amount of feats (especially meta-magic feats), and other accelerated abilites coupled with a combat system that has a dozen forms of movement and a dozen forms of Attacks of Opportunity -- it becomes a DM's nightmare. Particularly one that runs your style of game, Scoti, which is similar to what I like to do.
What I'm saying, Scoti, is that in running your game for those two weeks as you did, you avoided the clunkiness of the current combat system and added fun and imagination back into the game. Now, let's say for argument's sake, one of your players' character picked a fight with an NPC and inadvertantly dragged the party into the fray. That one combat, using the current 3.x system could potentially take up half the gaming session, essentially ruining the mood and fare you worked so carefully to establish. And it wouldn't have been your fault, or the player's fault, but rather the system's fault.
I'm 34 years-old, gentlemen, and I've been the DM since I was 11. Sure RL got in the way a few times over the years, but essentially I've been running this game my whole freakin' life. For the first time, I am beginning to explore variant systems. And I'm not just talking new house rules, of which I've always employed; rather, a new way of running things, a new system. I'm not here to bash the WotC system, but I must admit I've become somewhat jaded by it.
--Ghul
In my game I added a 6 second free action to speak anytime during combat. It works well as long as it isnt abused but i think that is the case with most rules. This has added more player interaction during combat and also helps speed things up. Also, making sure players know what they want to do by the time their turn comes up is another great way to make sure combat moves faster.
Combat in 3.X is much, much slower than any other version i have ever played but the amount of complaining due to rules or DM calls is near vanished with the new rules. It is a tight gaming system that takes a lot of time to learn and use if you got outside the core rules books. But that is where a choice must be made. If a DM uses only the core rules then the game will go much faster and be much easier handle at the higher levels.
The only problem is that most players want new, exciting, never before seen characters with multiple prestige classes and variant magic items. I tried to pass the idea of only using the core rule books around the table and my players didnt like that idea. So i kept on, keepin on. D&D is fun and I still believe that it IS, whatever you make it. Whether it be High Roleplay or High Combat or somewhere in between.
Every batch of players and their DM, and their interests, are going to be as different as the cards in a deck of many things.
I've been fudging the rules a little and having a lot more fun actually. In the last game I ran, my wife's character was about 100 feet away from the rest of the party, using her thief to go toe to toe with ogres and orcs while the rest of the party pounded them with magic and missile weapons. I guestimated distances and basically ran like a lot like I used to run 2nd Ed (not having as much exactness). It was a LOT of fun and I think everyone enjoyed it.
I also use Scoti's free speak option and it makes for much more banter during battles. We've also figured a quick and easy rule for using the Heal skill to see how badly hurt someone is.
. . . my experience running this system the past 5 1/2 years is this: as the characters ascend in levels, particularly post L10, the amount of feats (especially meta-magic feats), and other accelerated abilites coupled with a combat system that has a dozen forms of movement and a dozen forms of Attacks of Opportunity -- it becomes a DM's nightmare. . . . I'm 34 years-old, gentlemen, and I've been the DM since I was 11. . . . essentially I've been running this game my whole freakin' life. For the first time, I am beginning to explore variant systems. And I'm not just talking new house rules, of which I've always employed; rather, a new way of running things, a new system. I'm not here to bash the WotC system, but I must admit I've become somewhat jaded by it.
--Ghul
AMEN! 3X is, IMO, broken at higher levels. It plays nether smoothly nor well but bogs down to a crawl. That - speed of play or lack of same - is a design flaw. 3X has its strengths and weaknesses, but it is the first version of the game where any component of _how_ the game plays might be regarded as a serious flaw. I have had to "house rule" 3X more than any other edition to make it playable above 12th Lvl. I have also had to alter what kinds of adventures I can run at levels above 12 to make it playable. Classic monster bashes/dungeon crawls, for example, are out because they take too long to create and too long to run.
Bring on 4th Edition!
In my game I added a 6 second free action to speak anytime during combat. It works well as long as it isnt abused but i think that is the case with most rules. This has added more player interaction during combat and also helps speed things up.
My group sometimes spends hours in a single combat (this is with many foes), but we also roleplay the entire time. I enjoy the tactical elements, but I also agree that combat without roleplaying is boring. But they are not mutually exclusive.
AMEN! 3X is, IMO, broken at higher levels. It plays nether smoothly nor well but bogs down to a crawl. That - speed of play or lack of same - is a design flaw. 3X has its strengths and weaknesses, but it is the first version of the game where any component of _how_ the game plays might be regarded as a serious flaw. I have had to "house rule" 3X more than any other edition to make it playable above 12th Lvl. I have also had to alter what kinds of adventures I can run at levels above 12 to make it playable. Classic monster bashes/dungeon crawls, for example, are out because they take too long to create and too long to run.
For me, to *give the beast a name*, it was more or less the same, which made me return to 1e and got me interested in C&C. If not for my youthgroup, I think I'd be running 1e games only.
Not that d20 was bad, but a bit unbalanced IMO... Although very rich in alternatives, which older editions certainly aren't (to that extend).
AMEN! 3X is, IMO, broken at higher levels. It plays nether smoothly nor well but bogs down to a crawl. That - speed of play or lack of same - is a design flaw. 3X has its strengths and weaknesses, but it is the first version of the game where any component of _how_ the game plays might be regarded as a serious flaw. I have had to "house rule" 3X more than any other edition to make it playable above 12th Lvl. I have also had to alter what kinds of adventures I can run at levels above 12 to make it playable. Classic monster bashes/dungeon crawls, for example, are out because they take too long to create and too long to run.
Perhaps if you elaborate on what is wrong with 3e...
Remember, edition bashing goes in the Out of Print forum. This forum is for bashing other settings.
just kidding!
Perhaps if you elaborate on what is wrong with 3e...
Although I wasn't asked directly, but since I backed GVD's opinion, here just my two cents...
Nothing, really. I absolutely like 3e, because, rule-wise spoken, the system has no flaws (expect that I power magic-users down in my home game). What personally alienates me a bit from 3e, is that it tends to be just too complex for my personal style of game.
Really, my style of gaming hasn't really changed since 1e days, and the more I get into d20, the more I realize that the system is nice and well-thought, but not exactly what I am looking for. (Although my next campaign, hopefully starting in November, will run under the d20 system.)
Really, my style of gaming hasn't really changed since 1e days, and the more I get into d20, the more I realize that the system is nice and well-thought, but not exactly what I am looking for. (Although my next campaign, hopefully starting in November, will run under the d20 system.)
Then what are you looking for?
Then what are you looking for?
If I just knew that myself... 1e beefed up, I guess... so, 3e *light*, maybe... 
Doesn't make any sense, I guess... ;)
Ivid, it sounds like C&C may be the system you're looking for...... my understanding is that the design team were looking for d20 integrated-rules style with 1ed free-format play.
I've only glanced at it, and this is probably the wrong board to discuss in detail.
Ivid, it sounds like C&C may be the system you're looking for...... my understanding is that the design team were looking for d20 integrated-rules style with 1ed free-format play.
I've only glanced at it, and this is probably the wrong board to discuss in detail.
Yeah, I am indeed thinking about changing to C&C... Although I will stick with d20 at least for the next few campaigns, having finished a 1e campaign this summer... But you're right, this is a bit too much off-topic so far... ;) Just wondering if anybody has heard anything...