When you are the first and number one, if for no other reason than that you are the first, when number two comes along and garners more attention, or supplants you, it can scar you. Suddenly, you have a nemesis. If they do things markedly different than you, it is easy enough to not only see them as a rival but a rival who embodies everything that is wrong.
Greyhawk was first and the number one D&D setting for years. Then the Forgotten Realms came along and garnered more attention than Greyhawk, eventually supplanting it as the number one D&D setting. The Realms did things, or was perceived as doing things, differently. For many Greyhawk fans, the Realms apparently became not only a usurper but one that embodied a wrongness, when compared to the rightness of Greyhawk.
The big complaints against the Realms vis-a-vis Greyhawk appear to be that: (1) the Forgotten Realms is too scripted by novels or by designers giving too many juicy-bits to powerful NPCs; (2) the Forgotten Realms lacks verisimilitude because the level of magic and other fantasy elements predominate to too great a degree; (3) the Forgotten Realms are described in too many products that give too much detail which restricts DM freedom; and (4) too many Forgotten Realms products do not exhibit a high quality of design.
It is undeniable that the Forgotten Realms setting supports a huge number of novels and that events in many novels are reflected in roleplaying products. It is disingenuous to cry foul too loudly for Greyhawk’s creator clearly had a similar thought that only events prevented him from executing, and which he executed destructively in absentia. Beyond that, the Forgotten Realms novels, with a few exceptions, script events only in the way of background noise. Their effects are usually localized or provide a backdrop which does not restrict any but the most high level campaigning, or the most punctilious. What is more, the novels give the setting a sense of momentum, of change and of being a living place, not a static one. It is another matter entirely to speak of the Forgotten Realms novels, as novels, or as a source of particular events that will be reflected in the campaign. The basic concept is not inherently flawed, however, even if the details of the execution can be discussed as a matter of taste.
It is similarly common knowledge that the Forgotten Realms are home to any number of high level NPCs. Their exploits have been prominently featured in novels and in roleplaying products. These exploits do not detract from the sense of accomplishment or importance of any PC, however, except to the extent that the PC would cross paths with one of these NPCs. Otherwise, the exploits of the high level NPCs in the Forgotten Realms are, again, so much background noise. From a game design standpoint, these NPCs are a shorthand way of saying, “you are in the Realms,” when they appear and of providing very easy, if obvious, ways of promoting adventures. These are not illegitimate functions, even if they are not to every taste.
The Forgotten Realms do appear to support a high degree of magic, as well as the presence of any number of fantastic creatures or similar fantasy features. Even if so, this is purely a matter of taste, which cannot be right or wrong in an objective sense. It is not possible to fault the setting for having a particular emphasis or take on fantasy, particularly when the game itself allows for all that is present and more. Its a matter of taste, not religion or politics.
The question of the detail in which the Forgotten Realms has been described is predominantly one of presentation, IMO. Of course, with more products released, more specific details of the Forgotten Realms will have been described, to say nothing of details revealed only in the novels. That is hardly the basis for any reasoned argument, however, as a game publisher is in the business of producing as many products as its customers will purchase. This argument also fails when the relative size of the Forgotten Realms is considered. It is huge and few areas have been detailed in more than a one- or two- off way, although there are exceptions. Many large areas have seen virtually no development at all.
Where there is an argument to be made, I think, it is in how the details are presented. Greyhawk’s details are often presented in the context of an adventure and those details not strictly necessary to the adventure are left hanging, in loose ends that invite the imagination. Many of the details of the Realms are presented without the context of a specific adventure; many of the details are simply listed in a descriptive product. Those adventure hooks provided tend to be obvious and finite. The Forgotten Realms is not too detailed; it is detailed in a way that is less open-ended, and which too often does not invite speculation, which next to imagination, is the best friend of a DM. While not every Realms product is a closed circle, the majority have this character. While perhaps not inherently a fault, this type of presentation is limiting. It is here that the greatest distinction between the Realms and Greyhawk can be drawn, IMO, beyond matters that are predominantly related to individual tastes in fantasy.
Quality of design is subjective to a large degree but there is also a quantitatively definable objective quality in terms of language use, game mechanics and facilitation of game play. By any measure, the Forgotten Realms enjoys no generally greater or lesser percentage of quality products than Greyhawk. Both have their hits and both have embarrassing misses. Quality arguments tend to be strawman arguments if they are not simply obvious broadsides, polemics or partisan screeds.
Of the largest arguments against the Forgotten Realms and for Greyhawk, only the manner in which details are presented has any significant legitimacy well beyond simple individual taste, IMO. Greyhawks loose-end approach is more directly inviting of imagination than the closed-loop model that many Realms products exhibit. However, this said, loose-ends may be frustrating to some people and it is hard to argue that any lack of loose-ends in the details of the Realms is not more than made up for by the volume of various details, which is now an advantage, in the variety of ways in which they can interact.
The greatest difference between the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk is, then, mostly a matter of taste, and only slightly a matter of presentation, which may again default to individual taste.
IMO. :D
It seems like Realms bashing is a disease of ancient lineage. It is immortalized in The Grey and the Hawk and has more recently popped up in response to discussion of a possible Greyhawk Style Guide as well as discussion of what might next animate a relaunched Greyhawk. "What? You want it to be the Forgotten Realms?" This is unnecessary and foolish argument.
Hey, that was my quote, next time please make sure to attribute it.
The context was in regards to popularity. There is Greyhawk and then there is a highly, highly detailed Forgotten Realms campaign. I have read over and over the complaints of DMs regarding how they are locked into the actions of the supplements and the books from FR. Their players want to adventure in the published setting and not a variation thrown at them by the DM. But that is the more popular campaign, the campaign still being published.
It is no foolish argument to compare Greyhawk and FR and not want the perils that popularity can bring to a setting brought to Greyhawk.
- FR is more popular than any other setting because it was licensed to be used in videogames shortly after it was created, and many were made throughout the years. Dragonlance has just as many novels, if not more, than FR but novels alone don't boost a setting popularity among the masses.
- AFAIK, most Greyhawk players don't necessarily "hate" FR. They just don't want to see Greyhawk become a copy of FR. They're supposed to be different, otherwise the presence of one, or both, would become redundant.
- You're the one who was laughing at the people who posted their opinion in the thread regarding a new Player's book for Greyhawk. That came out as disrespectful towards other posters and really hits on your credibility. As you say in the end of your post, it's just your opinion, but belittling those whose PoV you don't agree with, just invites similar behavior towards you and your opinions.
- I actually like FR. I have a lot of material on that setting and plan to run a campaign there, when I have the time.
I would say more, but dinner is served and I must go. Play nice everyone...
The big complaints against the Realms vis-a-vis Greyhawk appear to be that: (1) the Forgotten Realms is too scripted by novels or by designers giving too many juicy-bits to powerful NPCs; (2) the Forgotten Realms lacks verisimilitude because the level of magic and other fantasy elements predominate to too great a degree; (3) the Forgotten Realms are described in too many products that give too much detail which restricts DM freedom; and (4) too many Forgotten Realms products do not exhibit a high quality of design.
Your argument seems to be that if I believe this, I'm wrong.
I find that insulting and I strongly disagree with it.
A few points, in no particular order:
- FR is more popular than any other setting because it was licensed to be used in videogames shortly after it was created, and many were made throughout the years. Dragonlance has just as many novels, if not more, than FR but novels alone don't boost a setting popularity among the masses.
- AFAIK, most Greyhawk players don't necessarily "hate" FR. They just don't want to see Greyhawk become a copy of FR. They're supposed to be different, otherwise the presence of one, or both, would become redundant.
- You're the one who was laughing at the people who posted their opinion in the thread regarding a new Player's book for Greyhawk. That came out as disrespectful towards other posters and really hits on your credibility. As you say in the end of your post, it's just your opinion, but belittling those whose PoV you don't agree with, just invites similar behavior towards you and your opinions.
- I actually like FR. I have a lot of material on that setting and plan to run a campaign there, when I have the time.
I would say more, but dinner is served and I must go. Play nice everyone...
Well said.
I might add that another reason FR became popular is that another audience heard about it: those that read comic books. This, of course; reminded everyone of The Dungeons and Dragon's cartoon. Marketing for FR has hit a lot of different audiences.
I might add that another reason FR became popular is that another audience heard about it: those that read comic books. This, of course; reminded everyone of The Dungeons and Dragon's cartoon. Marketing for FR has hit a lot of different audiences.
Well, thanks to Kenzer & Co, GH too has comics now. It's just a shame most GH fans don't know about them *sigh*
A few points, in no particular order:
- FR is more popular than any other setting because it was licensed to be used in videogames shortly after it was created, and many were made throughout the years. Dragonlance has just as many novels, if not more, than FR but novels alone don't boost a setting popularity among the masses.
- AFAIK, most Greyhawk players don't necessarily "hate" FR. They just don't want to see Greyhawk become a copy of FR. They're supposed to be different, otherwise the presence of one, or both, would become redundant.
- You're the one who was laughing at the people who posted their opinion in the thread regarding a new Player's book for Greyhawk. That came out as disrespectful towards other posters and really hits on your credibility. As you say in the end of your post, it's just your opinion, but belittling those whose PoV you don't agree with, just invites similar behavior towards you and your opinions.
- I actually like FR. I have a lot of material on that setting and plan to run a campaign there, when I have the time.
I would say more, but dinner is served and I must go. Play nice everyone...
BTW, I think anyone who gets *extremely negative feelings* because of a GAME has really some serious psychological defects...
And GVD, I think the main point why people here don't like FR too much is really something more obvious: While Greyhawk is game for all ages really, FR adresses mostly to younger readers/players. IMO, it's not very subtile and a bit childish, that's why I personally avoid it... *no rant intended*
Hey, that was my quote, next time please make sure to attribute it.
The context was in regards to popularity. There is Greyhawk and then there is a highly, highly detailed Forgotten Realms campaign. I have read over and over the complaints of DMs regarding how they are locked into the actions of the supplements and the books from FR. Their players want to adventure in the published setting and not a variation thrown at them by the DM. But that is the more popular campaign, the campaign still being published.
It is no foolish argument to compare Greyhawk and FR and not want the perils that popularity can bring to a setting brought to Greyhawk.
I cannot see any problem whatsoever with great popularity. What you describe above, I believe, is not fairly attributable to the setting but to the DMs and players you mention. DMs are "locked in" only to the extent that they allow themselves to be; they hold the key to their own cells - imagination. Players are certainly entitled to their preferences. DMs either: (1) cater to those preferences; (2) produce something other that players will like/accept; or (3) hook-up with players more in line with the DMs mind. None of this is the "fault" of the setting; it is the "fault" of the individual DMs and players, if there is "fault" at all.
It would, IMO, be fantastic if Greyhawk enjoyed the popularity of the Realms. That does not mean, however, that Greyhawk should or would have to become the Realms in such case. Detail, as I indicated, is not the problem, IMO, but rather how the details are presented. It is a distinction with a difference.
FR is FR. GH is GH. That is as it should be. But the notion that Greyhawk must eschew popularity and is better as a niche setting is just nutty, IMO. Equally nutty, IMO, is the idea that a popular Greyhawk would mean that GH had become FR or FR-like. It is not a zero-sum proposition. I think you can have popularity, and detail, without being the Realms.
Your argument seems to be that if I believe this, I'm wrong.
I find that insulting and I strongly disagree with it.
IMO, which I am fully entitled to, you are wrong if you are after the Realms for the reasons I mention.
If you find any expression of disagreement with your opinion insulting, well . . .
That you disagree is wonderful. :D Why? Or do you just disagree with no reasoned basis for disagreeing. You give none. FR is not perfect but I think the most common "bashes" which I have attempted to identify lack any basis in fact when examined as more than "common wisdom."
If Greyhawk must be built up by tearing the Realms down that, IMO, says nothing good about GH.
GH is my favorite setting and I believe it is better than any setting out there. I think it can stand by itelf, however, and does not need to be proped up by Realms bashing and false comparisons.
IMHO
Cheers,
Rick "Duicarthan" Miller
- AFAIK, most Greyhawk players don't necessarily "hate" FR. They just don't want to see Greyhawk become a copy of FR. They're supposed to be different, otherwise the presence of one, or both, would become redundant.
You have it the wrong way 'round.
I'm tired of FR ripping off Greyhawk and then everyone praising FR and dissing GH when if they weren't such ignorant morons, they'd realize half of FR IS GH.
Of course, that works vice versa too, as many idiots will proclaim how much FR sucks when if they weren't such tools they'd realize that half of FR IS GH.
But... whatever...
If Greyhawk must be built up by tearing the Realms down that, IMO, says nothing good about GH.
Who says everything I say and do has to be about GH?
I'm perfectly happy to tear the Realms down just for sucking like they do.
I am sure threads like these will go a long ways towards bringing the debate to a nice tidy conclusion. If only we had such level headed moderators to show us the way so many years of disagreement could have been avoided.
I personally find FR bashing completely acceptable and understandable. I have disliked the setting from the first boxed set and that certainly isn't going to change.
I am sure threads like these will go a long ways towards bringing the debate to a nice tidy conclusion. If only we had such level headed moderators to show us the way so many years of disagreement could have been avoided.
Wow. Don't dis the mods.
Yeah, don't dis the mods.
Delglath disses, pokes, prods and generally annoys WizO_Paradox.
Delglath disses, pokes, prods and generally annoys WizO_Paradox.
He's immune to that. Now, Irony or Sarcasm on the other hand... :P
You have it the wrong way 'round.
I'm tired of FR ripping off Greyhawk and then everyone praising FR and dissing GH when if they weren't such ignorant morons, they'd realize half of FR IS GH.
Of course, that works vice versa too, as many idiots will proclaim how much FR sucks when if they weren't such tools they'd realize that half of FR IS GH.
But... whatever...
You have it the wrong way 'round.
I'm tired of FR ripping off Greyhawk and then everyone praising FR and dissing GH when if they weren't such ignorant morons, they'd realize half of FR IS GH.
Of course, that works vice versa too, as many idiots will proclaim how much FR sucks when if they weren't such tools they'd realize that half of FR IS GH.
But... whatever...
I'm not sure what you mean with this post because, for the most part, I agree with you.
To make my point a bit clearer, I wasn't referring about the past or present of these settings. I was referring about the hypothetical future of Greyhawk. Since FR is more popular, I believe that Greyhawk fans are worried that WotC (or a third-party) may want to make it (even) more like FR in both "feel" and "scope", which would, in fact, lead to redundancy.
They're still very different and, if anything, they should grow apart, not into each other.
My
Who says everything I say and do has to be about GH?
I'm perfectly happy to tear the Realms down just for sucking like they do.
I personally find FR bashing completely acceptable and understandable. I have disliked the setting from the first boxed set and that certainly isn't going to change.
As I said, personal taste is personal taste. Hate FR all you want. I don't care for it when compared to GH either. But I think there are strawman arguments out there that try to dignify what is a difference in taste with some systemic flaw in the design of the Realms that just is not there.
To make my point a bit clearer, I wasn't referring about the past or present of these settings. I was referring about the hypothetical future of Greyhawk. Since FR is more popular, I believe that Greyhawk fans are worried that WotC (or a third-party) may want to make it (even) more like FR in both "feel" and "scope", which would, in fact, lead to redundancy.
They're still very different and, if anything, they should grow apart, not into each other.
My
I agree with this entirely. GH and FR are not and should not be the same. I do not see this as a danger, however. And popularizing GH so that is can make business sense to publish it does not mean turning it into FR because, if for no other reason, there already is an FR.
Changing GH to garner a greater audience so that it makes business sense to publish it, also does not mean making it into FR. FR is not the only option. It is not a zero-sum proposition - GH as is or FR. GH has already significantly changed once without becoming FR; it can do so again (hopefully with greater success) without becoming FR.
The argument that any attempt to popularize GH or change it means that GH will be made into FR is flat wrong; it is a scare tactic - invoking the FR bogeyman - invoked by those who do not want change and thus attempt to cast any thought of change in the worst light they can. The argument that change to GH mean that GH becomes like FR is transparent sophistry.
Then people keep complaining that there isn't enough material for Greyhawk.
Obviously those two positions are incompatible. The more material released that references Greyhawk, even if it is only adventures, the more detail that will exist. And the more detail that exists, the more that will have to be considered by subsequent authors, and thus the more resolutions of previous material determined by them that will be "locked into" the campaign.
That is the downside of using a published campaign. You don't get to determine what is in each new release, someone else does. Sure you can choose to use or not use what you like, but indeed the more time that passes the more divergence that will occur, and the more incompatible your games will be. This has been inevitable and intrinsic to every single campaign setting released by TSR/WotC, with the exeption of Spelljammer (which was thoroughly disjointed), and Birthright (which simply didn't last long enough).
Whether or not you can accept this is irrelevant. It is the reality. Where it becomes a problem is when some people feel the need to insult other people, be they writers or fans, when they embrace expansions and added detail. This is the major source of GH edition wars. Someone just can't deal with the fact that they don't own GH, and they don't get to decide what is in the new product, so they tear into the company, the author, and anyone who does like it.
Another effect, which can be termed style of the setting but is more often style of the authors, is the real source of differences between settings. In the case of FR and GH they can be found in an overuse of named NPCs to resolve dramatic situations in the FR, the large numbers of medium to high level nameless NPCs swarming the world, and the mass use of otherwise exceptionally rare creatures as opponents, among others. In other products, such as DL, it could be found in the initial modules being nothing more than someone else's campaign, with you being a sock-puppet for their characters to re-enact it. In PS it was a good deal of hardwired political interactions that had a massive amount of inherent cynicism in their presentation that went over the heads of way too many people, particularly the fans, as well as breaking several barriers of what was considered acceptable in fantasy modules and the outer planes. (Which I enjoyed greatly, and is why I consider it to be a superior product line.)
While some of this might be worth bashing, it still remains that some people do embrace this. More, it remains that nothing in particular is gained by trashing the style and preferences of others in the manner usually done. If you don't like a particular style the best way to change it is to actively present an alternative style, show people that there is another way to do things, and let them decide if that is what they like. If your alternative method is really that much better then people will embrace it. Now granted, I may be somewhat biased in favor of that method seeing as I have used it rather successfully, and I've backed it up with some of the usual crazed rants. But I kept those rants to restricted venues, and let the style speak for itself in presentation. (And of course it was a style paradigm I got from someone else to begin with.)
So tear down all you want. If you don't present an alternative then all you are really doing is labeling yourself, and often tainting whatever you support. I've heard more people say they've avoided Greyhawk because of the ranting fans than tried it because of said ranters.
I have posted earlier and treid to follow the discussion as good as I can, but there is one thing I honestly can't understand:
Why exactly are we discussing this question? -I mean, there was no recent thread I know of that revived that old discussion...
I mean, your opinions are all very controverse and interesting, but what caused the discussion? 
As far as I understand, there are three main groups:
-People who don't like FR because they think it spoiled Greyhawk... *Well, that's history IMO, we like it or not, there's nothing more to do about it... basically, it was not FR, but Gygax being mobbed out of his own company...*
-People who don't want to buy FR products because they don't appeal to them.*Well, that usually happens... If we compare rpg to fruits, you also don't buy every fruit just because you think apples are tasty...*
-People who tried the Realms but didn't like them. *That's okay with me, for I did so.*
FR being there or not doesn't bother me at my gaming table...
*Serious Question*
I have posted earlier and treid to follow the discussion as good as I can, but there is one thing I honestly can't understand:
Why exactly are we discussing this question? -I mean, there was no recent thread I know of that revived that old discussion...
Thread Post One, Paragraph One.
When there is a discussion of adapting or changing Greyhawk in a future incarnation (a favorite speculative topic), there is too often too easy a resort to "that will turn GH into FR," followed (usually) by "common wisdom" arguments about what is "wrong" with FR. As noted, in the opening post, this was recently the case, hence this thread.While FR is not GH and the two should remain distinct, it does no good, IMO, to "bash" FR, vis-a-vis GH for percieved "faults" with FR that, in fact, have no basis in fact. This kind of "bashing" attempts to obscure the actual discussion by resort to a strawman or bogeyman, advanced too often by those who desire no change at all, an insupportable position in the context of a speculative discussion of how GH might be revived - ie to be revived it will need to be changed in some sense to give the publisher a reasonable hope of a successful relaunch, recognizing that the publisher is a business and recognizing that GH in its present and past incarnations have not proven able to sustain a profitable relaunch, at least to the IP holder's satisfaction.
At the same time, as Samwise points out, Greyhawk fans have a reputation for being quarrelsome - even obstinately and obdruately quarrelsome with something of a mean spirit. "FR bashing" based on groundless "faults" with FR only makes matters worse. It is one this to differ, even passionately, over personal preference or taste; it is an entirely other matter to dress up personal preference or taste as something more by ascribing pseudo-"faults" to FR, trying to build up GH by tearing FR down.
That Wotc is not quick to reward the dedicated GH fanbase with more GH material, IMO, is due in no small measure to the obstinate, shoot-from-the-hip, even boorish reputation of too much of GH fandom. Of course, there must be business sense to any relaunch, but the case for such could be made much more easily if GH fans were not so difficult to deal with. I think Wotc doesn't much bother to get past "fan issues;" in a sense, they don't want GH fans if GH fans are going to behave poorly.
Erik Mona, the singular GH fan made good, is not a basher, is not confrontational and does not adopt positions vis-a-vis FR or any other design that would mark him as unreasonable or an extremist. He does not engage the "FR bogeyman" but has worked with Sean Reynolds, who wrote the latest edition, and has himself written for FR. It appears he is a team player, in the main. While this may be deemed "accomodationist" in some quarters, I think it perceptive in understanding that being a "loud GH fan" will get you less than nowhere with Wotc because "loud GH fans" who make baseless attacks on FR when trying to discuss GH only give themselves a bad reputation and accomplish the opposite of what every GH fan would like to see - GH relaunched in a sustainable fashion that yet served the interests of most GH fans.
As this discussion addresses baseless "Realms bashing," I think it confronts an ugly reality in such behavior. If we engage Samwise's point about the perception of the behavior of too many GH fans, I think we confront an even uglier, and more embarrasing reality, in behavior that is needlessly off-putting to the people who control the IP. I think by more than a casual measure, GH fans need to "get their house in order" to best promote GH's chances, going forward. A better model for interacting with the IP holder would be high on the list. Having said that, I am as guilty as the next person for, even while I do not bash FR, I have ripped Wotc for percieved slight to GH. It is easy enough to do, all around I suspect. But it would be profitable to turn these kind of self-defeating behaviors around, I think.
It seems one surefire way to not stop the madness is posting a pro-FR thread on the Greyhawk forum and chastising Greyhawk fans for not liking FR.
First, no one is "chastising Greyhawk fans for not liking FR." Rather, I suggested that FR not be bashed to build GH up and that, most certainly, FR should not be bashed for "faults" that are, in fact, more reflections of individual taste. Dislike FR all you want. For my part, it is not to my taste. What I suggest, however, is not to ascribe to FR "faults" that are not really faults but more expressions of taste. I hope this distinction is clear.
Second, only by opening the closet door can we get the skeletons out. GH fans have a reputation for mindless, knee-jerk FR bashing and for being generally "difficult." However uncomfortable, embarrassing or controversial, I think, these are issues that need to be discussed. As the IP holder, Wotc's perceptions become GH's reality. I'd like to see GH relaunched and relaunched successfully; I would not like to imagine that a chief impediment are the very fans looking for the relaunch.
Just to be clear, I am not suggesting GH fans self-censor or bowlderize their thoughts or opinions. I am suggesting that they pay some mind to how they are percieved (adults do that as a matter of course) and that they not indulge in baseless fault assessment in an inherently negative argument that builds GH up by needlessly tearing FR down. It is a difference with a distinction.
People keep complaining that the Forgotten Realms is over-detailed.
Then people keep complaining that there isn't enough material for Greyhawk.
Obviously those two positions are incompatible. The more material released that references Greyhawk, even if it is only adventures, the more detail that will exist. And the more detail that exists, the more that will have to be considered by subsequent authors, and thus the more resolutions of previous material determined by them that will be "locked into" the campaign.
That is the downside of using a published campaign. You don't get to determine what is in each new release, someone else does. Sure you can choose to use or not use what you like, but indeed the more time that passes the more divergence that will occur, and the more incompatible your games will be. This has been inevitable and intrinsic to every single campaign setting released by TSR/WotC, with the exeption of Spelljammer (which was thoroughly disjointed), and Birthright (which simply didn't last long enough).
Whether or not you can accept this is irrelevant. It is the reality. Where it becomes a problem is when some people feel the need to insult other people, be they writers or fans, when they embrace expansions and added detail. This is the major source of GH edition wars. Someone just can't deal with the fact that they don't own GH, and they don't get to decide what is in the new product, so they tear into the company, the author, and anyone who does like it.
I agree. Personally, I do not have a problem with this phenomenon.
Multiple, divergent Greyhawks, to me, add to the possibilities and in a setting that postulates "alternate Oerths" and a "multiverse," I will even say I find it oddly appropriate. It is, however, messy.
The more product = more detail equation also does not bother me, necessarily. As I've indicated, I think how the details are presented makes a difference. Is it a "loose-end" style or a "closed-loop" style? I only have an issue with the latter and even that can eventually break the loop when the detail becomes purely overwhelming for designers - then see divergent Greyhawk's above. :D
Now I understand better...
As far as I am concerned, the *Greyhawk fan* doesn't exist. I mean, we gather here, but everyone is cooking his own (gaming) soup...
It's curious that you think that Greyhawk fans hava a bad reputation; because, as far as I have experienced, they're the most tolerant and *somewhat intellectual* members of the entire game community (usually, because we are about 15 years older than the average gamer these days... Hey, and I am just 22!).
For me, the most enerving rpg geeks have always been Realmers, with their freaky attitude to buy *hundreds and hundreds* of books and loosing every tie to reality... And getting REALLY nasty if someone told that that it doesn't raise their social acceptance to speak fluent Drow...
However, I am not a friend of polemics; since FR is still the most widespread setting in Germany after DL (no 3e products available), most of the D&D players I know are Realmers and they're quite ok.
Well, thanks to Kenzer & Co, GH too has comics now. It's just a shame most GH fans don't know about them *sigh*
:pile: :pile: :pile: :invasion: Really?! I mean, no *Dork Tower*or *KotDT* but comics about the Flanaess, inked by such icons as Pat Lee, Frank Miller, Emiliano Santaluccia?!!
*Dreams*
Are they avilable? And are they really worth buying?!
http://www.kenzerco.com/periodicals/dnd/index.php
Unfortunately, they are now out of print (although I still find them in some of the local game stores in my country). I am lucky enough to have collected them all when they were still 'fresh' and don't regret it.
They all take place in GH.
In the Shadows of Dragons: Rel Astra & surrounding
Tempest's Gate: Bissel & Barrier Peaks
Black & White: Nyrond
Where Shadows Fall: (sequel to ItSoD) Phostwood (northern Nyrond)
The illustrator changed from issue to issue but, on average, the quality was good to excellent (apart, perhaps for B&W). The real gem was the plot & the characters because you could 'plug' them in a GH campaign very easily.
Some of the most memorable characters ever have appeared in these stories, such as the blind druid Sissel, the blue dragon Blackwing, the cleric of Hextor Abehhan-Vrre, or the tormented bounty hunter Kiernan (my personal favorite).
It's a darn shame they won't be producing more because they didn't reach a large enough fanbase (for a lack of advertising more than anything, IMHO)
To me, the top 3 issues were:
1) WSF #5
2) TG #2
3) ItSoD #1
Ah, it's a shame! The demo pages looked quite promising... There are not far too much *heroic fantasy* comic books from the US that are worth reading, IMO...
(If you are looking for something interesting, check the anime/manga series *Record of the Lodoss War* and *Berserk* - the later is very brute, but nevertheless very *dark fantasy.)
I hope they will do some kind of rerelease some day...
(I mean, the last US comic I read was Warlands, and that was really mediocre, IMHO...)
*Going to check ebay for the issues*
(If you are looking for something interesting, check the anime/manga series *Record of the Lodoss War*
Known and owned :D
The Japonese supposedly even published the setting but I have browsed eBay for months without locating a copy
There's a an interesting page called www.lodossdreams.net, where someone is trying to recreate *Forcelia* for 3e D&D...
Also, there is a notable amount of maps out there for the different cities and the island itself... I thought about doing a short campaign there for some time, but then decided against it... *When my exam trouble is over, I can send you the material I collected, if you want*
Ah, and BTW, it is hinted that *Crystania* is more or less Forcelia's Ravenloft... Ashram ends becoming king there...
Didn't know about the website though. Thanks Raf!
BTW, I started a thread about that topic a while ago. Check here for more info and links:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=334364&highlight=lodoss+war+d20+ivid