I just read through Mr. Reynold's piece on Boccob (The Uncaring), God of Magic in Dragon 338. I enjoyed the piece, but I was wondering what the GH sages here thought of the treatment. But I must first admit, I'm old-school, meaning I use Gygax descriptions as my primary source material IMC, but I'm not so hard-headed so as to ignore some of the newer ideas and plot threads that have developed over the years.
The article seemed pretty straightforward, which I respect. There were some interesting new spells presented, and also a few items. The temple of Boccob is very nice, as it can be ported into any existing campaign that uses "Core" gods.
Admittedly, I was particularly suspicious of Mr. Reynolds including Zagyg in the piece. Of course you have to make mention of Zagyg, due to his unique relationship with Boccob, but my feelings are this: since Zagyg is one of the only aspects of GH that Mr. Gygax has been able to retain, and since Mr. Gygax is currently exploring the mad arch-mage in his Troll Lords publications, I believe that Zagyg should, out of respect for the man, EGG, be largely left alone. In fairness, this is exactly what Mr. Reynolds has done. He presented the Zagyg history from mortality to immortality in a brief concise manner that is consistent with EGG's past work. I would've been unhappy if SKR went out on a creative limb and developed further back story on the mad arch-mage. WoTC and Paizo should leave this little bauble for the Father of the Game. So, in a nutshell, I appreciate that SKR didn't take any gratuitous liberties.
In fact, I'd say Mr. Reynolds, whether out of intention or not, did a fine job of drafting the article with old-schoolers and new-schoolers in mind. I give it a thumbs-up!
Notwithstanding, I'm interested in hearing what some of my favorite GH posters here think about the article, namely Samwise, GVD, and Grodog, as I tend to enjoy most of their GH observations, they being far more sage than I in such things.
--Ghul
Oggie
Heck, give me good background on others and I'll play one of their clerics.
Oggie
It's only going to be the Player's Handbook deities. No monster gods or "expanded core" gods.
"Core" is terrible. It should be Greyhawk, or not Greyhawk. Not some watered down generic version of the deities. I'm an angry old fart.
--Ghul
--Erik
Apparently so, because the article wouldn't be different at all if it said "Greyhawk Beliefs" instead of "Core Beliefs," except that the pun wouldn't work as well.
--Erik
Erik,
Hello, and thanks for the reply. It is always heartening to know that the editor-in-chief rubs elbows with the fans. Now then ...
As my first (the initital) post in this thread reveals, I was happy with SKR's piece, and I thought it was done quite well. Fun, informative, and full of little nuggets that can help expand Boccob in your campaign.
My problem with D&D "Core" is its seemingly arbitrary selection of a handful of deities from the GH pantheon(s) and the exclusion of the rest. That is why I say, "Greyhawk, or not Greyhawk."
It was not in reference to the Boccob article, per se; rather, it is my personal criticism of this "core" system WotC embraces. I would prefer they either embrace GH fully and really make it the standard D&D world, or just leave it alone to be developed as an official campaign setting -- or even send GH to a third party publisher.
The in-between route they have chosen just rubs me the wrong way. And I'm not alone. I mean, thank-you for the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer, but if you remove it from consideration, what remains is a shoddy excuse of Greyhawk materials these past five years, leaving us 'Hawkers to rely on publications from 1e and 2e.
Well, at least we have:
1.) Gygax and Kuntz releasing Castle Zagyg. Do these fathers of GH still have "it"? Can they still wow us with their ingenuity and creativeness? Well, if Castle Zagyg, Yggsburgh is any indication, I would say yes. But I would be remiss if I didn't reiterate that I do lean towards old-school.
2.) Dungeon magazine and its Age of Worms mega-adventure series, thank-you again, sir.
In a nutshell, my criticism of "Core" was not intended as a shot at you or the publications you edit; rather, at the sytem to which you are obligated to adhere to.
Yours,
--Ghul
Is Mayaheine in the "Core" group or not?
Oggie
I don't have the 3.5 books, so this isn't a stupid question (I think).
Is Mayaheine in the "Core" group or not?
Oggie
No, she isn't. None of the quasi-deities or demigods are for that matter AFAIK. The core deities in the 3.5 book are the same as the 3rd edition ones incidentally. That chapter is cut-and-pasted practically verbatim.
Greyhawk was the core material in the first edition books. Why such a bitter reaction for essentially the same set up in the current edition?
I wouldn't mind it so much if at least they had chosen to include the "true" version of the GH deities they selected for the Core Rules. . . .Wee Jas which has gone from a deity of magic that also takes care of the souls of the dead to a divine patron of necromancers. Given her own priests couldn't even attempt to command undeads without asking her first in previous editions, that's quite a step in the wrong direction!
Wrong. See -
http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=578
http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=579
Nutshell - WeeJas is Boccob's magical equivalent and Nerull's necromanic equivalent - ab initio. It is only in later editions that a need was felt to "distinguish" WeeJas by "limiting" her portfolio. Boccob and Nerull have a rival. Her name is WeeJas.
--Erik
Sean even uses the term 'Oerth' for cripe's sake.
Wrong. See -
http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=578
http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=579
Nutshell - WeeJas is Boccob's magical equivalent and Nerull's necromanic equivalent - ab initio. It is only in later editions that a need was felt to "distinguish" WeeJas by "limiting" her portfolio. Boccob and Nerull have a rival. Her name is WeeJas.
Those article are only your opinion about the matter (and one not exactly impartial where C.S is concerned, I'm afraid). While entertaining, it's far from being undisputed. For instance, Wee Jas' (and the other former "greater" Suel deities) apparent demotion to a lesser status could very well be linked to the simple fact that much of her "chosen ones" (aka the Suel folks) died at the same time as the Suel Empire. Since that "demotion" occured in 2E, when a god's power was still directly proportional to the number of his/her worshippers, that's another likely hypothesis (and, yes, that is my opinion).
Besides, I don't see how that interferes with what I said. You can be a god of Death without becoming the divine patron of necromancers or favoring undeads. The way Wee Jas (and, indeed, many other deities) was treated in Complete Divine only made me wish I hadn't bought it.
Not to mention that IIRC she gained Death in her portfolio only through the death (ironically enough) of millions of citizens of the Suel Empire (which qualifies as a "big" loss of worshippers). That she is the "Boccob" of the Suel, I don't dispute. But the "Nerull" too? Hardly.
(edited last ยง because I stand corrected on that point)
But before that she certainly represented all schools of magic, necromancy included. So she was always a goddess of necromancy. She continues to be a goddess of necromancy and every other magical school as well.
It doesn't say anywhere that I'm aware of that the former Suel god of death is dead. It might have been Nerull under another name, in fact, though I prefer to think that the former Suel goddess of death was Beltar.
I suspect the Pelor article will have a Mayaheine sidebar, just as the Fharlanghan article will contain a Celestian sidebar, just as the Boccob article contained a Zagyg sidebar. After we finish the first round, who knows?
--Erik
Good. It was trying to find some data on Mayaheine that originally took me to canonfire. The only problem with on-line resources, though, is that you can't manually insert it in your players.
Oggie
But before that she certainly represented all schools of magic, necromancy included. So she was always a goddess of necromancy. She continues to be a goddess of necromancy and every other magical school as well.
Yes, and she is thus also the goddess of abjuration, conjuration, divination, etc...
That's still no argument in favor of a Wee Jas that favors necromancers & undeads over other forms of magic. As I said before, you can be the God of Death without being an undead-lover. Look at Kelemvor (of the FR) for an example.
Yes, and she is thus also the goddess of abjuration, conjuration, divination, etc...
That's still no argument in favor of a Wee Jas that favors necromancers & undeads over other forms of magic. As I said before, you can be the God of Death without being an undead-lover. Look at Kelemvor (of the FR) for an example.
Morepierre is right. By that reasoning, Boccob could be the god of illusions (or necromancy, even).
Those article are only your opinion . . .
It is not opinion that WeeJas has been represented in different ways in each of her major descriptions.
It is not opinion that WeeJas has been "limited" only in subsequent descriptions.
It is not opinion that as originally described she was every bit the magical equal of Boccob and the necromantic equal of Nerull (albeit those descriptions were all very abbreviated).
What is opinion is my contention that small minds could not imagine any two greater gods with the same portfolio elements (albeit in dissimilar pantheons) being interesting - these small minds being unable to see anything interesting in such a portfolio rivalry - but instead being able only to concieve of one supreme entity for any one portfolio element. This is the simple absolutism of the seventh or eighth grader in about 1986. But they never out grew it. Their thinking never developed any greater sophistication.
What is my opinion is that dim bulbs saw that WeeJas "had" to be "put in her place" because she did not appear on stage in the Gord novels to the same degree as Boccob and Nerull. "Fiction" then drives game play to these sorts, despite the obvious fact that the Gord novels cannot be a template for Oerth in the game because they destroy Oerth, conflicting at the same time with the introduction to the 83 set for extra measure.
What is my opinion is that WeeJas has been so obviously gerrymandered that there is no possible logical or consistent explanation for her wildly variant descriptions except that the intent was to gerrymander (or else that the designers, whenever WeeJas has popped up for description, have been almost uniquely sloppy).
It is almost inevitable, given WeeJas' variant descriptions, that to use WeeJas one needs choose which "canon" description one prefers. In such case, I prefer the original conception that offers complexity precisely because it sits alongside aspects of Boccob and Nerull. The less sophisticated but more easily comprehensible resort to seeing Boccob and Nerull as, respectively, arcanely and necromanticly superior to WeeJas holds no appeal for me. Then again, I wasn't in gradeschool in 1986 nor am I "forever young" athought in that way.
That's still no argument in favor of a Wee Jas that favors necromancers & undeads over other forms of magic. As I said before, you can be the God of Death without being an undead-lover. Look at Kelemvor (of the FR) for an example.
Please. Portfolio includes magic and death. While this does _not_ demand that such equal necromancy and only necromancy, it is clearly and obviously suggested. Necromancy is death magic. This is no leap of the imagination.
Oh yeah. Wears necklace of skulls. Holy symbol is a representation of a skull. Sounds like . . .
Every DM can do whatever he or she wants. On the whole, this debate is pointless and fruitless, as are most debates concerning Greyhawk. Just agree to disagree, and stop hijacking threads with bandwidth-wasting debates.
We have Nerull, Vecna, Kyuss, Pyremius, Tharizdun, etc... we don't need another "really badassss death god". I think Wee Jas was changed to fill a niche, and I think it makes sense that woshippers have more to do with a deities niche than not, perhaps when the Suel Imperium was at its heyday Wee Jas was the primary necromantic deity of that time.
I always liked that. In my own 2nd ed. campaign, there was a lost temple to Wee Jas in the Corusk Mountains (might be misremembering the name - between the Frost and Snow Barbarians). One of the PCs played a psionicist with amnesia. Turns out, she had been an evil priestess of Wee Jas from that temple who was teleported away after a magical experiment. She appeared near a monestary where the monks used psionics and they pretty much wiped her brain.
She was later given the chance by the god Red Fox to learn of her past. She opted to learn EVERYTHING though was advised against it by the representative of the god. She failed her save and the old personality took over for a short time (until she tried to steal the Mace of St. Cuthbert, which the party had been sent to retrieve, and it turned her lawful good).
I liked the concept that Wee Jas could be worshipped by priests of any of the good/neutral/evil alignments so long as they were lawful.
Please. Portfolio includes magic and death. While this does _not_ demand that such equal necromancy and only necromancy, it is clearly and obviously suggested. Necromancy is death magic. This is no leap of the imagination.
Death doesn't equal necromancy. When you're the goddess of Magic AND Death, you're not the goddess of Magical Death. Sorry, two different things. I am not saying it couldn't happen but it's not a certainty (nor "clearly" or "obviously" suggested).
Oh yeah. Wears necklace of skulls. Holy symbol is a representation of a skull. Sounds like . . .
A common symbol of a DEAD (that is, not UNDEAD) person. If you were the god of dead folks, which symbol would you pick? A flower? Let's be serious here...
Yes, and she is thus also the goddess of abjuration, conjuration, divination, etc...
Exactly.
That's still no argument in favor of a Wee Jas that favors necromancers & undeads over other forms of magic.
Whoever claimed that? If anything, she favors Evocation (the fireball in her symbol) and Charm (from her dominion over vanity, and the general tendency toward subtlety in Suloise magics).
Oh, and a small pet peeve: "undead" is both the singular and plural form of the word, as in "the dead," usually used collectively. It's also an adjective.
By that reasoning, Boccob could be the god of illusions (or necromancy, even).
He is.
Oh, and a small pet peeve: "undead" is both the singular and plural form of the word, as in "the dead," usually used collectively. It's also an adjective.
Since everyone else is nitpicking stupid points of a unresolvable argument, undead is always plural when used as a noun.
For example, if I say that Napoleon Bonaparte was a silly man who was afraid of cats, someone might chastise me for speaking ill of the dead. "The dead" in this case refers to just one man, Napoleon, since I wasn't speaking ill of anyone else. If I say that Vecna is a silly man who thinks magic is some kind of big snake, he might chastise me for speaking ill of the undead, I guess.
I guess.
And if I'm walking down the street with a cart yelling "Bring out your dead!" and someone throws only one corpse in it, that'd be okay. If I yell "Bring out your undead!" and someone throws only one Xaene the Two-Headed Lich in it, I wouldn't be sure if Xaene counted as one lich or two.
But yeah, I wouldn't say, "I don't know if Xaene counts as one undead or two undead." That sounds wrong. "Undead" in that case should only be used as an adjective - "I don't know if Xaene counts as one undead wizard or two undead wizards."
Firstly, I believe the Suel deities were created by Lenard Lakofka, not Gary Gygax, and came (along with the Spindrift Isles) originally from Lakofka's campaign world before being spliced into Oerth.
Secondly, Wee Jas was described as lawful neutral (evil) in Dragon #88, not plain lawful neutral.
Thirdly, although Wee Jas is listed as a greater goddess, her stats are substantially weaker than either Nerull's or Boccob's, making intermediate goddess a fairly good interpretation.
While Wee Jas is a powerful magic-user and necromancer, she is a poor illusionist compared to Boccob. She is quite a lot better at commanding undead than Nerull is, though Nerull seems more interested in destroying the undead (along with the living) than commanding them; his primary servants are demodands.
This all adds up to a fairly complex picture.
Wee Jas is a powerful goddess, but not as mighty as either Boccob or Nerull. She oversees all schools of magic except that of illusions, and is particularly interested in necromancy. In fact, ignoring Vecna and Kyuss (a mere lesser god of secrets and a hero-deity), she's probably the primary deity of necromancers in the Flanaess. She is the guardian of the dead, but is more concerned with protecting them from raise dead spells (and Nerull?) than necromantic magic. Perhaps she trusts her own worshippers to use such magic responsibly, but protects the dead from those not part of her flock.
The restriction on illusion magic should probably be seen as an artifact of 1st edition AD&D rules, when illusionists were a seperate class, although arguably that school of magic belongs at least partly to Syrul (who is a more powerful illusionist than Wee Jas is) instead.
It's interesting that Wee Jas is specifically noted as being worshipped in the Theocracy of the Pale. I suppose she handles the side of life that Pholtus cannot.
Her clergy have always been restricted from raising the undead, so why would arcane magic users specializing in necromantic magic worship her? Doesn't make much sense to me.
Her clergy have always been restricted from raising the undead
That restriction was new to 2nd edition and eliminated in 3rd edition. It didn't exist in her original description.
My statement that Boccob's stats were better refers to the fact that he had 149 more hit points, two points better intelligence, three points better wisdom, five points better dexterity, and twelve points better constitution. Their charismas were the same. He had better weapon resistance, better magic resistance, regeneration, and one more attack per round. Whether this is a great enough justification to make Boccob a higher-ranking deity is a matter of opinion: certainly, with regards to their portfolios, Wee Jas seemed to have a greater command of hers than Boccob did of his. Perhaps Boccob was the mightier deity but slightly lazy, while Wee Jas had less raw divine power but made up for it with her greater studiousness and focus.
I notice Norebo is 25th level, too (a thief), so I guess you can't go by highest character level alone.
There are a few errors in GV Dammerung's Wee Jas article.
Firstly, I believe the Suel deities were created by Lenard Lakofka, not Gary Gygax, and came (along with the Spindrift Isles) originally from Lakofka's campaign world before being spliced into Oerth.
Secondly, Wee Jas was described as lawful neutral (evil) in Dragon #88, not plain lawful neutral.
Thirdly, although Wee Jas is listed as a greater goddess, her stats are substantially weaker than either Nerull's or Boccob's, making intermediate goddess a fairly good interpretation.
Nope. Check the GH 83 Boxed Set. Creator - EGG. Align - LN. Status - GG.
Of course, the entire point of the article is that WeeJas then morphed, not once, but 5 times with no apparent rationale and none given.
The stats given for WeeJas' avatar are just that and avatar stats do not necessarily have a one to one correspondance with the power of the goddess; GG/IG/LG status is not equivalent to "monster status," as divinities are not just big monsters.
The illusionist reference must be read in the context of the AD&D rules at the time that distinguished illusionists from MUs, but otherwise to say WeeJas is not a great patron of illusionary magics is fair comment.
Were I drafting a definitive piece on WeeJas, I would start at the beginning - GG/Magic and Death. The later "versions" I would explain as being symptoms of the rivalry between Boccob and WeeJas and Nerull and WeeJas. In other words, either propaganda or "hits" from which WeeJas ultimately recovers. In the later case, I might tie-in the WeeJas entry from the PS product On Hallowed Ground - perhaps mindful that "magic is fading on Oerth," WeeJas is transitioning away from being a purely Oerthly deity and toward becoming a more "at large" planar deity, like Celestian.
I expect it will be very much in line with what has recently written regarding her clergy including AoW and other adventures like Mad God's Key.
As always you can go to the source, but getting Gary to remember details and post them to a message board...well, good luck with that.
I prefer to be a little more pragmatic with my GH canon.
Nope. Check the GH 83 Boxed Set. Creator - EGG. Align - LN. Status - GG.
Like I said, I'm pretty sure that Lenard Lakofka's Wee Jas is the original version, and that Gary Gygax incorporated her into his campaign as he did Lendore Isle (named after Lenard Lakofka), Blackmoor (from Dave Arneson's campaign), and probably other things as well. See this page, for example, which also believes this to be the case. As such, I think any discrepencies between the boxed set and the Dragon article were either an error on Gygax's part or the result of Lakofka's evolving thoughts on the matter.
That she wasn't formally written up until Dragon #88 doesn't mean that she didn't exist earlier in Lakofka's home game.
The stats given for WeeJas' avatar are just that and avatar stats do not necessarily have a one to one correspondance with the power of the goddess; GG/IG/LG status is not equivalent to "monster status," as divinities are not just big monsters.
I want to agree with this, as your thoughts echo mine here. Certainly 1st edition deity stats resemble avatars in the sense that if you kill them, the deity isn't personally affected except insofar as they can't move out of their home planes for a time.
The difference between Wee Jas' and Boccob's and Nerull's printed stats might be explained by Lakofka just not bothering to be consistent with Gygax's already existent standard, or by Wee Jas electing to put less energy in her material form than the other gods. However, I think attributing the difference to relative power levels is also a valid interpretation.
I'm not arguing that Wee Jas should be an intermediate deity, only that this might be a reasonable interpretation of the existing materials. It's almost certain that Carl Sargent didn't have Lakofka's Dragon articles available to him when he wrote From the Ashes, as the two interpretations have little in common; this therefore probably wasn't Sargent's own rationale for Wee Jas' "demotion," but the interpretation might be reasonable nonetheless.
What is my opinion is that dim bulbs saw that WeeJas "had" to be "put in her place" because she did not appear on stage in the Gord novels to the same degree as Boccob and Nerull.
I think you vastly overestimate the importance of Gygax's novels to the authors who shaped Greyhawk's published history, especially around the time Wee Jas started pulling the multiple personality act. I see no evidence in "Greyhawk Adventures" that Jim Ward took the novels into account, nor are there any signs in the City of Greyhawk boxed set or even From the Ashes that suggest Gord's story played much of a role in the development of the Flanaess. By the time Sargent wrote "Iuz the Evil," it seems clear that he had read the first two Gord books, but if there's evidence the books played a role in the boxed set itself (and hence Wee Jas's treatment therein) I'm not aware of it.
Sean K Reynolds wrote up Wee Jas in both the Scarlet Brotherhood and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer. From personal conversations with Sean and by looking at his work (Scarlet Brotherhood in particular) it seems pretty clear that he didn't treat the Gord books as any kind of road map.
As for Wee Jas's slim portrayal in D&D since the birth of 3.0, in the Player's Handbook and elsewhere, I don't think you can find anyone associated with her development who would admit to having remembered much from the books, if they had even read them when they were kids.
So, while I agree with you in the main that Wee Jas has taken on several different personas since the beginning and I think your essay on the subject is illuminating, I can't agree with your diagnosis as to the cause.
--Erik
Sean, who I have met only twice, has done a great job.
Eric, as always...keep up the Greyhawk stuff.
I'm not arguing that Wee Jas should be an intermediate deity, only that this might be a reasonable interpretation of the existing materials. It's almost certain that Carl Sargent didn't have Lakofka's Dragon articles available to him when he wrote From the Ashes, as the two interpretations have little in common; this therefore probably wasn't Sargent's own rationale for Wee Jas' "demotion," but the interpretation might be reasonable nonetheless.
I agree here in principle. It "could" have been offered up as a sort of rationalization. Unfortunately, all of the WeeJas' are unexplained in their variations and permutations.
I think you vastly overestimate the importance of Gygax's novels to the authors who shaped Greyhawk's published history, especially around the time Wee Jas started pulling the multiple personality act. . . . So, while I agree with you in the main that Wee Jas has taken on several different personas since the beginning and I think your essay on the subject is illuminating, I can't agree with your diagnosis as to the cause.
--Erik
Lord love a duck! I'll hold you to that, if you don't mind.
The article, however, does not look to ultimate causes, intentionally because they are amorphous. I simply point out and document the senseless transitions. I am editorializing here in a way I did not in the article because I cannot "prove" my hypothesis in a reasonable manner, at least not without getting into trouble. I remain, however, convinced that Gord has had an outsized impact in some quarters even if I cannot "prove" the matter. This belief is, however, separate from the article.
Not to pop any bubbles here but undoubtedly SKR is going to be doing the write up in Dragon for Wee Jas. It will undoubtedly contain the same conversion philosophy that was started in 2nd edition.
I like SKR's work with really only one exception - The Scarlet Brotherhood. I have no problem if he scripts WeeJas. I would hope he would be more thoughtful if he does so but if not . . .
Sean K Reynolds wrote up Wee Jas in both the Scarlet Brotherhood and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer.
Believe it or not, given my outspoken dislike of most of SKR's Greyhawk work (IMO, his FR work was of better quality, perhaps his design style is better suited to that setting's feel), I have no real issues with his treatment of Wee Jas.
My only real gripe with the 3.x incarnation of the goddess is the emphasis on necromancy and undeath in her portfolio, but this is most likely more due to Cook/Williams/Tweet than it is to SKR. The inclusion of a sampling of GH gods in the PHB forced some modifications on the gods as they later appeared in the LGG.
The earlier portfolio of Death, Law, Magic and Vanity works just fine for me, but the added emphasis on Necromancy and Undeath, no doubt derived from "Death + Magic = THE DEAD LIVE!" needs some further development to make it work with previous canon, IMO. I'm much more of the opinion that the emphasis should be "Death + Law = GET BACK IN YOUR GRAVE!"
Oggie
Well, at least we have:
1.) Gygax and Kuntz releasing Castle Zagyg. Do these fathers of GH still have "it"? Can they still wow us with their ingenuity and creativeness? Well, if Castle Zagyg, Yggsburgh is any indication, I would say yes. But I would be remiss if I didn't reiterate that I do lean towards old-school.
Wait, let me make sure I understand.
Core Greyhawk in 3e/3.5e is not real Greyhawk because WotC doesn't use everything the setting has to offer, but the money pandering nostalgia dreams of two designers well past their Greyhawk prime is?
Ingenuity and creativity... Um, yeah, right.
Two words : Castle Zagyg
Another word : Rehash
What exactly is ingenious and creative about a half-assed rehash of 30 year old material?
Wait, let me make sure I understand.
Core Greyhawk in 3e/3.5e is not real Greyhawk because WotC doesn't use everything the setting has to offer, but the money pandering nostalgia dreams of two designers well past their Greyhawk prime is?
Ingenuity and creativity... Um, yeah, right.
Two words : Castle Zagyg
Another word : Rehash
What exactly is ingenious and creative about a half-assed rehash of 30 year old material?
:::Yawn:::
Sorry, mate, I'm not quite interested in debating with you. I'm too busy watching paint dry.
--Ghul
:::Yawn:::
Sorry, mate, I'm not quite interested in debating with you. I'm too busy watching paint dry.
--Ghul
Oh come now, Gygax's d20 work isn't that boring...
:P
It was not in reference to the Boccob article, per se; rather, it is my personal criticism of this "core" system WotC embraces. I would prefer they either embrace GH fully and really make it the standard D&D world, or just leave it alone to be developed as an official campaign setting -- or even send GH to a third party publisher.
>>snip<<
Well, at least we have:
1.) Gygax and Kuntz releasing Castle Zagyg. Do these fathers of GH still have "it"? Can they still wow us with their ingenuity and creativeness? Well, if Castle Zagyg, Yggsburgh is any indication, I would say yes. But I would be remiss if I didn't reiterate that I do lean towards old-school.
2.) Dungeon magazine and its Age of Worms mega-adventure series, thank-you again, sir.
In all seriousness, what bothers me about this post is the double standard.
Erik/Paizo/WotC/Sean are criticized for being forced by the present publication situation to "genericize" the Greyhawk content in Dragon/Dungeon, referring to the gods as part of the 'core' pantheon, or labelling Greyhawk City the 'Free City'.
Then, a paragraph or two later, Gygax and Kuntz are championed for the same thing. Greyhawk nostalgia aside, CZ is not a Greyhawk product, and even Gygax has pointed out that revision and recollection mean there are going to be differences from the original castle and the one that Troll Lord (supposedly) is publishing.
If you're playing 3.5th edition, Living Greyhawk inspired Greyhawk, I'm going to go out on a limb and make a bold statement: Mona, Reynolds and Holian have, through their work in Dragon and Dungeon, a lot more relevance to your campaign than RJK and EGG. This isn't bias against them, and in fact, RJK at least has somewhat joined the modern Greyhawk team with his Maure Castle adventures, but simply put, CZ has little relevance to the modern campaign, especially given that both authors have been aggressively outspoken about their dislike of the modern material. If Erik, Sean, Gary and the others currently writing for modern greyhawk have to soften the edges a bit so the Eberron and Forgotten Realms players don't start to think we're piddling in their sandbox, so be it.
If Erik, Sean, Gary and the others currently writing for modern greyhawk have to soften the edges a bit so the Eberron and Forgotten Realms players don't start to think we're piddling in their sandbox, so be it.
There's also the issue that Dragon/Dungeon have to appeal to all flavours of D&D players. As nice as it would be to have them become Greyhawk Journals, it's not going to happen. Paizo have to make money and WotC have to market the campaign worlds they are actively investing in. It would be better if Greyhawk wasn't the campaign setting that dare not speak its name, but these are the reasons why.
As CD says - better GH by stealth or core generica than no GH at all. Or to put it another way - would you prefer to have articles on Tyr or Mask or some other FR god you have no oerthly interest in? If every generic article on Boccob or Wee Jas makes just one noobie develop an interest in the Greyhawk setting from which the gods derive, then that's got to be a good thing. We Greyhawkers are a greying breed - so any new blood that can be infused into the fan base is good (one of the good points about LG, btw - whatever your opinion of that campaign).
CD also has a point about the D/D stuff being more relevent to the modern setting than the stuff created by the First Ones. At the bottom of it, it comes down to preferences - some people like everything the First Ones do; they like the old school, kick in the door and let's not worry too much about the backcloth of the setting feel. Others (and I number myself among them) like the rich tapestry of the world that's been built upon the foundations laid by the First Ones.
I can see why Gary and Rob dispise the new stuff. As Neil Gaiman recently said in an interview, seeing what other people do with your work is like your kids coming home with a tattoo, a nose ring or a mohican - surprising (and not necessarily pleasently so), but you've got to accept that there's nothing you can do to change it. However, I wholeheartedly disagree with Gary and Rob's take on the new Greyhawk. I love the dynamic, darker Greyhawk of 591+ CY. There's enough room in the Greyhawk setting (in time and space) for everyone to get what they want out it. What's not helpful is when one or other "tribe" starts saying its Greyhawk is the One True Path.
That said, just remember, kids, winter is just Pholtus' way of saying throw another grognard on the pyre. :P :P :P :D
P.
That said, just remember, kids, winter is just Pholtus' way of saying throw another grognard on the pyre
Yep. And why did he create the sun? Why, with all the heretics around, he needed a giant-sized bonfire! :P
In all seriousness, what bothers me about this post is the double standard.
I don't see it that way, but I also must admit it is silly of me to post my displeasure with WotC on a WotC board, because the people who frequent this place are likely to be fans of the product, of which I am somewhat critical of after running 3/3.5 for five years. But that is another topic, another digression.
Erik/Paizo/WotC/Sean are criticized for being forced by the present publication situation to "genericize" the Greyhawk content in Dragon/Dungeon, referring to the gods as part of the 'core' pantheon, or labelling Greyhawk City the 'Free City'.
No, no, no. You misinterpret my words and meaning. I am critical of WotC alone, not Paizo, not Erik. In fact, I see Paizo and Erik as champions of the cause. SKR, I'm not sure of, because I don't know what role he may have had in the decision making process when it came to presenting the current watered-down version of GH that "core" represents. That being said, I began this thread because I enjoyed his piece on Boccob! I also look forward to his werewolf sourcebook coming out. Again, I digress.
Then, a paragraph or two later, Gygax and Kuntz are championed for the same thing. Greyhawk nostalgia aside, CZ is not a Greyhawk product, and even Gygax has pointed out that revision and recollection mean there are going to be differences from the original castle and the one that Troll Lord (supposedly) is publishing.
They wrote some Castle Greyhawk stuff a long time ago that never saw the light of publication due to well-documented legal issues. Now they are publishing it, slightly altered and in a different town and milleu. Some fans want to see this stuff. I am among them. You don't have to be among them if you don't wish. It's all good.
If you're playing 3.5th edition, Living Greyhawk inspired Greyhawk, I'm going to go out on a limb and make a bold statement: Mona, Reynolds and Holian have, through their work in Dragon and Dungeon, a lot more relevance to your campaign than RJK and EGG. This isn't bias against them, and in fact, RJK at least has somewhat joined the modern Greyhawk team with his Maure Castle adventures, but simply put, CZ has little relevance to the modern campaign, especially given that both authors have been aggressively outspoken about their dislike of the modern material.
I'm not playing 3.5 or Living Greyhawk. I'm playing Castles & Crusades with the GH '83 boxed set, CY 576, with CZ. But I am not opposed to infusing various elements of subsequent publications thrown in my campaign at my liesure, and that includes 1e, 2e, and 3e. It's not to say Living Greyhawk isn't good or fun for those who play it. It is not to say that modern GH 591 CY is not good or fun for those who play it. If you enjoy your game, then game on! What I was simply trying to say was that I don't care for the "core" treatment of GH, because I feel it is a disservice to old-school and modern fans alike. That is my opinion. If you like the simplicity of the "core" treatment it's fine by me. Have fun!
If Erik, Sean, Gary and the others currently writing for modern greyhawk have to soften the edges a bit so the Eberron and Forgotten Realms players don't start to think we're piddling in their sandbox, so be it.
I understand and sympathize with their dilemma. They have to wear several hats at the same time in order to satisfy all crowds. So be it, indeed.
Beer!
--Ghul
Yep. And why did he create the sun? Why, with all the heretics around, he needed a giant-sized bonfire! :P
HERETIC!
Pelor is the sun.
He didn't need any two bit Pholtus twerp to "create" him.
All Pholtus managed was to divide the day up into hours. He created a clock, big whoop.
:D
HERETIC!
Pelor is the sun.
He didn't need any two bit Pholtus twerp to "create" him.
All Pholtus managed was to divide the day up into hours. He created a clock, big whoop.
:D
I dare you to say that out loud within hearing range of Priest-Commander Reifus "the Paganhammer" of the Church Militant!
I dare you to say that out loud within hearing range of Priest-Commander Reifus "the Paganhammer" of the Church Militant!
I did.
He got uppity.
Now he is Commander Reifus "the Charcoal Briquet" of the Church Incinerated.
It is 10.5 pages (not counting the two page intro art-blurb), so they devoted alot to Boccob and didn't spare much. The article also didn't skimp on Greyhawk references which should make us happy given WotC's lacking in that department. I am not just talking a Zagyg sidebar either, it fully and freely mentions Oerth, Wee Jas, Tharizdun, etc.
The format:
-Lengthy background (almost 2.5 pages)
-Cleric's role
-Relations with other religions (The Wee Jas commentary should spark a new round of debate)
-A wizard's role
-Holidays
-Three myths (I expect these to be great sources of discussion)
-Prestige class suggestions
-Relics of the Faith (A Boccob article w/o magic items? nay!)
-New divine spells (which I may note are also arcane)
-NPC contacts for clerics of Boccob
-Planar ally (the Burning Eye, kinda neat. Can't wait to see more of these critters)
Sidebars:
-The basics on Boccob
-Holy texts
-Aphorisms of Boccob (these were neat too)
-Zagyg (half a page, not too shabby for a non-Core god)
-Boccob's monster summon list
-Map of a temple of Boccob
So in summary, good start for the series, they touched on more areas than I expected. If every deity gets this much attention it should be something to look forward to each issue. And IIRC Reynolds won't be doing them all. Erik Mona also mentioned in greychat a few weeks back which deities were next in line but I forgot. Anyone else recall?
I suspect the Pelor article will have a Mayaheine sidebar, just as the Fharlanghan article will contain a Celestian sidebar, just as the Boccob article contained a Zagyg sidebar. After we finish the first round, who knows?
--Erik
Hope this helps. Kord and St Cuthbert are mentioned somewhere as well.
Oggie