What is so special about Greyhawk?

[pawsplay]

I'm going to have to quibble with you on this one. Given that Greyhawk was explored almost exclusively through modules and those modules were absolutely dripping in magic items, and very powerful magic items to boot, the idea that Greyhawk was somehow less wahoo than FR depended an awful lot on whether or not you actually played those modules.

Those adventures and opponents were exceptional. In Greyhawk, there was a town to go back to where the 6th level sheriff was not necessarily dripping with magic items and orcs were mostly worth fighting for coin and spare weapons. A world where a death knight had an 80% chance to be equipped with a magical sword. Certainly, Greyhawk could get a little wahoo, but on average, things tended to even out, and the wahoo generally did not extend to every corner of the gameworld.

 

[Desdichado]

I get the impression those guys are kind of busy at the moment

Yeah, so WotC better start talking to them early. Project management, people. Project management.

 

[alleynbard]

I was initially quite impressed with the Paizo map, but I eventually found myself reverting to the original Darlene map - simply because her(?) map has so many beautiful hand-drawn details.

This blog illustrates that nicely:
Jeff's Gameblog: a blog about games and stuff: The Pekulish Script

Thank you for that Riley, I really appreciated it. So much so, you get some XP.

I had always loved the Darlene map and have found it superior to anything produced since.
This is a major, major part of it. No where else do you see the kind of labeling that Darlene did. It is one of many reasons to love that map.

 

[Mallus]

Those adventures and opponents were exceptional.

But those adventures were the ones a lot of people played. That makes them commonplace.

A world where a death knight had an 80% chance to be equipped with a magical sword.

This chance went up to %100 if using a published module.

There's a big disconnect between the item frequency (and wahoo frequency in general) described in the rule books and the published adventures. My experience is that the adventures set the baseline. The charts in the DMG and MM amount to textbook cases, with little real (real-fake?) world applicability.

 

[jdrakeh]

To me, Greyhawk, as presented in the modules, IS the airbrushed van sort of fantasy. You had wahoo settings for the adventures, robots, demons and various other things popping up all over the place and you were battling GODS by the end of more than one module (or at least beings powerful enough to be able to see divinity on a clear day).

Yeah, I have to agree. Many of the modules were not at all in line with what was represented in the folio. There are some serious gonzo moments out there. This is why I always considered the modules as optional accessories, not as canon setting supplements (and, IMO, I don't think the early Greyhawk modules were ever presented that way).

 

[aboyd]

But those adventures were the ones a lot of people played. That makes them commonplace.

I rarely played any of them. Most of my adventures in Greyhawk have been just as presented by others in this thread -- a sort of sword & sorcery environment, where magic exists but is not common, where the morality of those around you is likely to be questionable, and where phat loot is tempered.

Of course, one person is not a counter-example, but I think what we have here is clearly shown to be many people on each side. Run games however you want. High magic or low. Whatever works. But it's clear that some people were attracted to Greyhawk for a reason, and that reason works for them. It's fair to let them have their reason.

 

[C_M2008]

I like bits and pieces of greyhawk, but the setting is still very "meh" to me, fairly bland and generic mid-magic level fantasy.

I wouldn't be against them doing it, except it means they can't use the slot for that year for something more interesting.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Those adventures and opponents were exceptional.

No they werent, they were the baseline. If you used the treasure tables, you quickly experienced similar results. There was a great disconnect between the words of the designers and the actual game experience using the published adventures and the rules they wrote.

We were completely loaded in 1st edition, with little to actually use it on, as we didnt feel like running an army or a pile of henchmen (otherwise we'd play an actual wargame).

 

[darjr]

I just realized one of the reasons I love Greyhawk.

Those modules were gonzo, in a world that wasn't.

I mean that most of the world up front had an almost normal historic feeling and depth, but there were dragons in those hills. That helps build a sense of adventure that is addictive and thrilling.

To go from an almost medieval town or village or city with it's medieval issues and problems to find a lost starship filled with wonder, adventure, and danger, is amazing.

Living in a world that was, day to day, almost normal and primitive, and yet know of Iuz and dragons and the planes and the whispered hidden riches guarded by unearthly dangers is deeply fulfilling.

Yea, I love Greyhawk. I missed all of 2e Greyhawk, much of the end of 1e and all but the last few moments of 3e, so the old gazateer/boxed set and the 1e adventures is still very much what my Greyhawk is.

 

[mach1.9pants]

What is si special about Greyhawk...

...IIRC there was a race in the box set I got that had modifiers to 5 of 6 ability scores, that is pretty special! (Valley elves? I could be misremembering though, it was a while ago)