-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
What is so special about Greyhawk?
- Thread starter Verys Arkon
- Start date
tylerthehobo
Explorer
Never has there been so much nostalgia for so little content as Greyhawk - and don't take that the wrong way - the reason I think many folks cling to it so is that it was intentionally vague in its setting, with defined factions, nations and a handful of NPCs, so that "my" Greyhawk would of course be different from "your" Greyhawk. Much as Gygax was often quoted saying that he felt each DM's game should be different from another with house rules, mechanics etc. so too do the same rules apply to the campaign.
Greyhawk makes for an excellent sandbox, and also I miss the convention games from recent RPGA years. In an era when I was mostly playing scripted Eberron games, playing more free form GH games at Cons (even with the limited time and scope of an RPGA game) was a welcome relief.
I'm hoping 2010 does welcome a new Greyhawk - it deserves its due for a glossy setting done right.
Greyhawk makes for an excellent sandbox, and also I miss the convention games from recent RPGA years. In an era when I was mostly playing scripted Eberron games, playing more free form GH games at Cons (even with the limited time and scope of an RPGA game) was a welcome relief.
I'm hoping 2010 does welcome a new Greyhawk - it deserves its due for a glossy setting done right.
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
Hey Erik, just a quick word of thanks. Over the years you've been one of the foremost people carrying the Greyhawk torch and keeping the world alive and fresh. I always read reverence and delight in your Greyhawk work; I haven't always agreed with how you've developed the world, but you've done it with joy and respect. In case I haven't said it before, that makes me really happy.
Lars Porsenna
First Post
Eh, I dunno. If WotC decides the only way they can do it is to blow up the setting, I'd rather they not..
My dream would be for the setting to be handed off to Paizo. Considering the density of GH fans there, I know they would do it justice...
Damon.
Thanks! I've enjoyed working on the setting over the years and I think Greyhawk fans are the best fans in the world. Thinking back to the AOL folders of 1992 and the "ungerground" era of Greytalk, it's amazing to still see "The Grey in the Hawk" by Nitescreed being quoted whenever this topic comes up, and it's amazing to see that the setting is still going strong almost 30 years after it first came out.
And as much as the setting minutia is popular with scholars of the setting, D&D is not really about scholarship so much as it is about adventure, and I believe the Greyhawk setting's popularity is largely due to the incredible adventures set there.
Insofar as Maure Castle and The Whispering Cairn and Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk are a part of that legacy, I'm happy to have had a chance to play in the sandbox.
--Erik
fireinthedust
Explorer
Speaking as someone who knows of Grayhawk only through the Demonomicons and clips from 3.x sources, I honestly thought it was an only vaguely-illustrated setting that anyone could write anything for. Granted, there was that quasi-soap opera about famous NPCs (Tasha/Iggwilv and Grazz't, Iuz, Vecna, etc.), but I really thought they were the only detailed parts of the who thing. Like how dungeon drawl classics has a "map o the world" but the focus is on the modules.
Specifically this is because there are loads of FR products that came out, and virtually none for Grayhawk. I asked RPGA fans and they told me that any 3.x book not for FR was basically GH. Like how POL is the default 4e setting, with sites like Winterhaven, sure, but nothing outside of modules that's really "canon".
Erik Mona (and everyone else, I guess): I wouldn't want Paizo to be distracted from Pathfinder. I'm a 4e fan, for the rules, but I really enjoy the setting; I think it's really set a high bar for any campaign I run, in terms of detail and scope for the game setting (nations, takes on classic things like the Underdark, etc.). Thanks.
Still, if I wanted a really 1e gritty, classic feel for a campaign... I would enjoy a GH game. Also Wilderlands (bought the boxed set, still havn't digested everything!), but I can see a lot of carry-over between, say, the City State of the Invincible Overlord and, say, a city in the Flanaess.
Specifically this is because there are loads of FR products that came out, and virtually none for Grayhawk. I asked RPGA fans and they told me that any 3.x book not for FR was basically GH. Like how POL is the default 4e setting, with sites like Winterhaven, sure, but nothing outside of modules that's really "canon".
Erik Mona (and everyone else, I guess): I wouldn't want Paizo to be distracted from Pathfinder. I'm a 4e fan, for the rules, but I really enjoy the setting; I think it's really set a high bar for any campaign I run, in terms of detail and scope for the game setting (nations, takes on classic things like the Underdark, etc.). Thanks.
Still, if I wanted a really 1e gritty, classic feel for a campaign... I would enjoy a GH game. Also Wilderlands (bought the boxed set, still havn't digested everything!), but I can see a lot of carry-over between, say, the City State of the Invincible Overlord and, say, a city in the Flanaess.
Hussar
Legend
To be honest, almost all my experience with Greyhawk came from the modules. But, by the same token, if you start perusing the old Dragon articles, there was some pretty heavy duty assumptions there as well.
Let's not forget, if you wanted to really make out like a bandit, slaughtering the villagers in Hommlet netted you MUCH more loot than the Moathouse.
It seems pretty high magic to me when farmers have magic weapons.Again, going to disagree with you. That 6th level sheriff, if he was statted out by a module, likely had a magical weapon, magical armor and, quite possibly, another item or two.
But, didn't the modules predate the folio? My history is a bit fuzzy. I know I picked up the boxed set way back when, but, I don't remember if it was new or had been around for a while when I did so.
On another note, Erik Mona, while I may have had some unkind words with you in the past, your work with Greyhawk has always been excellent. Well done you.
Starfox
Hero
What was special to me about Greyhawk was the sense of history; Suel vs Oerdian, Vecna vs Kas, Nyrond vs Great Kingdom. The emerging cosmpopolitan, merchantile cities like Greyhawk, Dyvers, and Irongate defying the old feudal states. The elven schisms, with drow and valley elves as offshots. All of these are neutrally aligned story elements. There are good and evil people on each side, fighting for loyalties more than alignment. This makes the world feel vibrant and real.
The problem is that there are few clear-cut enemies. The players can either be as Gray as the world, aligning themsleves with one faction, or they can strive to uphold the greater good and risk getting on the bad side of all the factions. In my games, the players always choose the side of good, becoming peacemakers and striving to undo the evil within each society rather than making one society dominant. Because of this, it is quite conceivable that they get into conflict with neutral or good organization in the world, such as some dogmatic paladin orders or the Circle of Eight. Knowing my players, they'd try to bring such a a conflict to a peaceful resolution, but conflict is definitely possible.
Comparing to Forgotten Realms, political divisions there are much more along alignment lines. The forces of good in FR might not cooperate well, but they do not join forces with evil allies to fight their good neighbors as they could in Greyhawk.
The problem is that there are few clear-cut enemies. The players can either be as Gray as the world, aligning themsleves with one faction, or they can strive to uphold the greater good and risk getting on the bad side of all the factions. In my games, the players always choose the side of good, becoming peacemakers and striving to undo the evil within each society rather than making one society dominant. Because of this, it is quite conceivable that they get into conflict with neutral or good organization in the world, such as some dogmatic paladin orders or the Circle of Eight. Knowing my players, they'd try to bring such a a conflict to a peaceful resolution, but conflict is definitely possible.
Comparing to Forgotten Realms, political divisions there are much more along alignment lines. The forces of good in FR might not cooperate well, but they do not join forces with evil allies to fight their good neighbors as they could in Greyhawk.
(Speaking as one of Starfox' players
Yes, that kind of challenge can be very frustrating, but because of that also very fun to try, and rewarding when and if you succeed.
CruelSummerLord
First Post
One of the greatest appeals of Greyhawk, and one that Gygax himself pointed out in the 1E Dungeon Master's Guide, was that a lot of the setting's details were left deliberately sketchy so individual groups could put their own spins on it. You could make the world dark and bloody, more light-hearted and humorous, high or low magic, pulp Conan-style adventures or epic Tolkienesque battles of good and evil, whatever suits you.
This was also elaborated in how the setting was developed through modules as opposed to the sourcebook/novel-heavy approaches of Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms. There were few arbitrary additions to official canon outside of the modules themselves, and your gaming group directly influenced how they turned out. If the drow were defeated in the Against the Giants modules, for instance, then Geoff, Sterich and the Yeomanry will not be invaded and you've just radically altered a possible outcome of the Greyhawk Wars. Potentially dramatic shifts in play could be worked out by your group based on your own actions, rather than on pre-set outcomes decided on by sourcebook and novel authors.
Hence why so many fans hated the Greyhawk Wars, and I also have a certain distaste for Living Greyhawk-from From the Ashes onwards, official setting canon was now being added by TSR/WoTC fiat that many players had no say or influence over, something that to my mind goes directly against the original spirit of the setting. The one golden rule of Greyhawk is, to me, that your group alone decides what is canon. The 1983 boxed set will be an obvious jumping-off point, but from there you should feel free to take what canon you like and discard the rest, an approach I use in my own Canonfire articles, where I only do research if I feel like it and include only those canonical facts that I like.
Don't put too much faith in Nitescreed's Grey in the Hawk, as it's largely a series of strawman attacks directed against the Forgotten Realms. That said, both that essay and some of the other posts here demonstrate the conventions that developed among devoted fans-namely, that the world is a firmer shade of neutal grey rather than a battle of good versus evil; that magic is not as prevalent as in a place like the Forgotten Realms; that it's more Robert E. Howard and Fritz Leiber than J.R.R. Tolkien in its overall tone, although there's plenty to work with if you decide to go the Tolkien route; that the forces of good and evil are somewhat more pragmatic in that good nations can be at each others' throats or can ally with ostensible enemies if they work towards a common goal; and that the overall power levels are lower than they are in FR, for instance.
These tropes are generally accepted by Greyhawk fans, although you can and should ignore any or all of them if you think it would benefit your campaign. Greyhawk is flexible enough that you can alter the tone and power level as you see fit and still run an enjoyable game.
Again, if there's something in canon you don't like, throw it out and make up whatever you want in its place. I personally prefer to assume that Expedition to the Barrier Peaks never happened, that there are no crashed starships, robots or other science fiction knicknacks in the setting, to the point where gunpowder and the internal combustion engine do not function, which precludes the rise of guns or industrialization and keeps Greyhawk more or less permanently frozen at its pseudo-medieval technological level, although gnomes can elaborate other forms of technology, like combination locks and printing presses.
Does that have any basis in Greyhawk? Not particularly, since Gygax's and Kuntz's original games were littered with sci-fi tropes, but I prefer to keep Greyhawk pure and untouched by these things, and the setting is flexible enough that I can quietly put them in the dustbin without too much fuss.
This was also elaborated in how the setting was developed through modules as opposed to the sourcebook/novel-heavy approaches of Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms. There were few arbitrary additions to official canon outside of the modules themselves, and your gaming group directly influenced how they turned out. If the drow were defeated in the Against the Giants modules, for instance, then Geoff, Sterich and the Yeomanry will not be invaded and you've just radically altered a possible outcome of the Greyhawk Wars. Potentially dramatic shifts in play could be worked out by your group based on your own actions, rather than on pre-set outcomes decided on by sourcebook and novel authors.
Hence why so many fans hated the Greyhawk Wars, and I also have a certain distaste for Living Greyhawk-from From the Ashes onwards, official setting canon was now being added by TSR/WoTC fiat that many players had no say or influence over, something that to my mind goes directly against the original spirit of the setting. The one golden rule of Greyhawk is, to me, that your group alone decides what is canon. The 1983 boxed set will be an obvious jumping-off point, but from there you should feel free to take what canon you like and discard the rest, an approach I use in my own Canonfire articles, where I only do research if I feel like it and include only those canonical facts that I like.
Don't put too much faith in Nitescreed's Grey in the Hawk, as it's largely a series of strawman attacks directed against the Forgotten Realms. That said, both that essay and some of the other posts here demonstrate the conventions that developed among devoted fans-namely, that the world is a firmer shade of neutal grey rather than a battle of good versus evil; that magic is not as prevalent as in a place like the Forgotten Realms; that it's more Robert E. Howard and Fritz Leiber than J.R.R. Tolkien in its overall tone, although there's plenty to work with if you decide to go the Tolkien route; that the forces of good and evil are somewhat more pragmatic in that good nations can be at each others' throats or can ally with ostensible enemies if they work towards a common goal; and that the overall power levels are lower than they are in FR, for instance.
These tropes are generally accepted by Greyhawk fans, although you can and should ignore any or all of them if you think it would benefit your campaign. Greyhawk is flexible enough that you can alter the tone and power level as you see fit and still run an enjoyable game.
Again, if there's something in canon you don't like, throw it out and make up whatever you want in its place. I personally prefer to assume that Expedition to the Barrier Peaks never happened, that there are no crashed starships, robots or other science fiction knicknacks in the setting, to the point where gunpowder and the internal combustion engine do not function, which precludes the rise of guns or industrialization and keeps Greyhawk more or less permanently frozen at its pseudo-medieval technological level, although gnomes can elaborate other forms of technology, like combination locks and printing presses.
Does that have any basis in Greyhawk? Not particularly, since Gygax's and Kuntz's original games were littered with sci-fi tropes, but I prefer to keep Greyhawk pure and untouched by these things, and the setting is flexible enough that I can quietly put them in the dustbin without too much fuss.
Similar Threads
