What exactly makes the Greyhawk Campaign Setting

Because I've nominally played several games in Greyhawk. And yet, I've not noticed anything that wouldn't fit perfectly well in any other generic setting. No special places, or groups of people, or cultures, or whatever.

So, aside from a handful of NPCs, what makes Greyhawk Greyhawk?

Scarlet Brotherhood, Iuz, Suel Oerdian, Flanni, the Sea of Dust, Castle Greyhawk... overall it's pretty generic though.

The version of Greyhawk that I am playing right now has as a prominent feature, the attempted manipulation and control of the Flanaess by several powerful demon lords, most prominently Orcus. Going back to the earliest Greyhawk products, demon lords were almost always making incursions into the world. From ToEE and GDQ tro the present, their involvement is a feature of the campaign world.

DM

Nitescreed said it best, way back in the days when TSR's forums were part of AOL and Greyhawk was the bastard stepchild of 2nd Edition:

The Grey In The Hawk

Screed said and did a lot of things that I disagreed with when I knew of him online, but this particular piece absolutely nailed the setting.

[EDIT: I can't get the URL to link directly to Nitescreed's piece. Click on the link that reads, "Nitescreed's Words".]

Nitescreed's words said:

Rather, in Greyhawk you will find adventure without such NPCs suggesting it. In the Forgotten Realms, for example, Elminster is famous for sending characters on their way. The Harpers do the same. Ultimately, Elminster or the Harpers play the directing role and may indeed appear to steal the show or otherwise claim ultimate victory. In Greyhawk, YOU are the hero.

Click to expand...

That statement are more myth than anything. Yes, the FR is rich with powerful NPCs and villainous organizations...but nowhere does it say that individual DMs must, or even should, use them in these ways. As long as we're just talking aboput games, this is a DM issue, not a setting issue.

To answer the intial poster, you're right: there's really nothing in Greyhawk thats gonna make you go Wow. It's a generic campaign setting only because it was the one with no act to follow. Every one that came after needed to be different in order to define itself in a market. Thus more well defined settings.

Ultimately, it IS a little plain, but its my opinion that Greyhawk is only intended as a backdrop for the do-it-yourself DM. The original box set just contained some maps, a brief paragraph or two about each nation and region, a paragraph or two about a small number of power groups, a section on deities (concerned more with the deities' stats than the people that worshipped them) and not much else other than weather patterns and encounter tables.

Basically you got a great map, and enough info to get your game started. (as opposed to getting your "story" started)

I like it. In a sense, many other settings (FR for one) make me feel like I've bought a coloring book with the pictures already colored in.

Admittedly I'm no Greyhawk expert. I use the box set by Gary Gygax and thats it. Never paid any attention to any other stuff that came out after. (come to think of it, I dont use a lot of the stuff in the box set either.)

Sorry I couldnt be more help. You're kinda asking for something thats not there.

Canonfire is a neat site, check it out for more Greyhawk info.

Trev

That's about what I was expecting, actually.

I was just wondering why, if there was so little actually TO Greyhawk, they decided to put anything in it.

Theron said:

Nitescreed said it best, way back in the days when TSR's forums were part of AOL and Greyhawk was the bastard stepchild of 2nd Edition:

The Grey In The Hawk

Screed said and did a lot of things that I disagreed with when I knew of him online, but this particular piece absolutely nailed the setting.

[EDIT: I can't get the URL to link directly to Nitescreed's piece. Click on the link that reads, "Nitescreed's Words".]

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that essay defines GH more as "Not Forgotten Realms" than as anything positive. I don't know much about Oerth, but it's hard to sell a setting when your argument boils down to 'it doesn't include the stuff that I think makes the other setting horrible'.

Matthew L. Martin

Shadowslayer said:

Ultimately, it IS a little plain, but its my opinion that Greyhawk is only intended as a backdrop for the do-it-yourself DM.

Click to expand...

This certainly makes sense. D&D developed from the Dungeon outward. I'd assume Greyhawk developed the same way.

There is good flavor in Greyhawk (I always like the flavor of the Rhenee, although there was very little information on them). However, the flavor isn't really a theme of the setting.

Of course, Forgotten Realms has this, too. There really isn't much of a theme, either. Look at Ed Greenwood's early articles that touched on the Realms. The one that comes to mind is the "building a pantheon" one. It basically tells you how to pick and choose deities from many sources, tweak them occasionally, and make them the gods in your world. Not a way to build a setting with a strong theme.

The early campaigns weren't put together as campaign worlds, per se. They were the backdrop of adventures that eventually developed into a world. Mystara/Known World probably is closest to having a "theme" and that's mostly because of later products (Wrath of the Immortals comes to mind).

I think the later campaigns all have themes. Dark Sun was a very dark, gritty world of survival. Planescape had it's own theme that made it more than just a "adventuring in the planes" type of world. Ravenloft had "hopeless fight against supernatural evil" as its theme. Birthright had the "divine right of kings" as it's theme. Eberron has "pulpish adventure and noir intrigue" theme running through it.

Matthew L. Martin said:

Unfortunately, that essay defines GH more as "Not Forgotten Realms" than as anything positive.

Click to expand...

I'll agree there. Much of it comes off as a bitter old grognard griping about the Realms rather than defining Greyhawk. Many of his definitions of Greyhawk are about how the setting does things compared to the Realms. As someone who is more or less neutral on this old debate, I'm not impressed. To me, the fact that Greyhawk remained largly vanilla is both its greatset strength and its greatest weakness. It's still around because many gamers from the early '80s were able to develop it into their own setting, and thus formed an attachment to it. However, that led to the problem of how to expand the setting and gain new fans; the old guard weren't interested in buying new products that simply rehashed old material, and when new stuff was added (Greyhawk Wars), they bitched about how it isn't their Greyhawk, and didn't buy it anyway. I think that Gary's departure from TSR probably contributed to some of their rejections as well. That's one thing that amuses me but also annoys me about these grognards, they complain about how all the other settings suck compared to Greyhawk, say that Greyhawk is best because they can make it whatever they want, then complain about how there isn't enough published for Greyhawk, only to reject anything that is published because it doesn't go with what they've done with the setting.

I'm seeing double, arrrgh.