Keith said:
I just agree with Faraer that, to paraphrase, the D&D rule system now has the cart in front of the horse in this regard. Hence the need for the question in the first place, in my view.
I don't see in any way why thoughts like these are especially "wrong". In fact, I think that this sort of though process is natual and useful.
The simple fact is that D&D is a collection of stylistic elements that we as D&D players appreciate. We like to see these tropes used. They are familiar and comfortable to us.
But at the same time, many players appreciate variety. So it only makes sense to examine what other situations logically facilitate these elements.
To imply that Greyhawk is the only proper context to use these elements is, well, ludicrous. For one, these elements were cribbed from other fantasy fictions - Tolkien, Moorcock, Anderson, Vance, and others. Gygax ported this elements. Why is it okay for Gygax to work these elements into a world, but it is not okay for the rest of us?
Second, IIRC Greyhawk was not the first D&D game world. Blackmoor was.
Question: In the Traveller RPG, it was typical to try to decide what a world was like by trying to explain a random pattern. Is this "putting the cart before the horse"? No, it's just using patterns and drawing logical conclusions for inspiration, and a very useful technique.
If someone finds a different interperetation of existing elemetns that provides ideas for the campaign, how is that bad? After all, it's this sort of thinking applied to elements from fantasy fiction that brought us D&D in the first place.
So please, set aside this appeal to primacy, it is inherently faulty.