D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[pemerton]

Some of those prior online lists of Greyhawk gods for instance have the tons of expansions of gods from 3e and 3.5 sourcebooks.

That's why when I want lists of GH gods I use GH materials - the boxed set, From the Ashes, the later 90s stuff, and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer.

They aren't derived from Greyhawk. They ARE Greyhawk. Greyhawk is the default setting, which is why it was used for the Living Greyhawk games.

I think the reason that Greyhawk was used for the Living Greyhawk game is because otherwise it would be very poorly named!

I believe the word Greyhawk does not appear anywhere in the 3E PHB. It just presents the world of Dungeons & Dragons. As I've posted, when I want to understand how Boccob relates to worshippers I refer to my GH materials, not the irrelevant sideshow of the 3E DDG. (Which also does not contain the word Greyhawk.)

 

[Lyxen]

That's why when I want lists of GH gods I use GH materials - the boxed set, From the Ashes, the later 90s stuff, and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer.

Then you get the list of gods for the periods of history covered by these supplements. But gods rise, evolve and die, in Greyhawk. I am like you in that I love that boxed set and I had the marvelous map on the wall of my room for ages. But if I want to look at later periods, just as for the maps, I look for the gods in the supplement corresponding to that period.

I believe the word Greyhawk does not appear anywhere in the 3E PHB. It just presents the world of Dungeons & Dragons. As I've posted, when I want to understand how Boccob relates to worshippers I refer to my GH materials, not the irrelevant sideshow of the 3E DDG. (Which also does not contain the word Greyhawk.)

You're right, I never realised that Greyhawk did not appear in those books.

 

[Voadam]

I believe the word Greyhawk does not appear anywhere in the 3E PHB. It just presents the world of Dungeons & Dragons.

The 3.0 and 3.5 PH do not use the word Greyhawk. They just present Greyhawk setting elements as setting elements of the world of 3e Dungeons and Dragons and no D&D World setting elements that are not Greyhawk. And then there is the 3.0 Dungeons and Dragon Gazetteer that does not use the word Greyhawk in its title either but says "Welcome to the world of the D&D game!".

Are there any Greyhawk/3e World of D&D elements in the PH or 3e DDG that you feel are inconsistent with GH?

The Living Greyhawk Gazetteer for instance on page 171 mentions Heironeous as recently promoting longswords even though he himself uses an axe: "Known for his great magic battleaxe, he recently has been promoting usage of the longsword in order to appeal to common soldiers as well as paladins and leaders."

 

[Lanefan]

The 3.0 and 3.5 PH do not use the word Greyhawk. They just present Greyhawk setting elements as setting elements of the world of 3e Dungeons and Dragons and no D&D World setting elements that are not Greyhawk. And then there is the 3.0 Dungeons and Dragon Gazetteer that does not use the word Greyhawk in its title either but says "Welcome to the world of the D&D game!".

Might this be due to the word "Greyhawk" somehow still being - or being perceived to be - legally tied to Gygax at the time in some way, meaning WotC felt they couldn't use the name but could use the underlying features? (legitimate question, I've no idea as to the answer)

Otherwise it makes no sense to use so many elements of a specific setting as examples without once naming the setting.

 

[Campbell]

Might this be due to the word "Greyhawk" somehow still being - or being perceived to be - legally tied to Gygax at the time in some way, meaning WotC felt they couldn't use the name but could use the underlying features? (legitimate question, I've no idea as to the answer)

Otherwise it makes no sense to use so many elements of a specific setting as examples without once naming the setting.

The Living Greyhawk Gazetteer was an official release that coincided with the release of 3e. They mostly left Greyhawk to the RPGA Living Campaign to manage.

Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (Dungeons & Dragons: Living Greyhawk Campaign): Erik Mona, Frederick Weining, Gary Holian, Sean K Reynolds: 8601422779288: Amazon.com: Books

Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (Dungeons & Dragons: Living Greyhawk Campaign) [Erik Mona, Frederick Weining, Gary Holian, Sean K Reynolds] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (Dungeons & Dragons: Living Greyhawk Campaign)

www.amazon.com

 

[Voadam]

Might this be due to the word "Greyhawk" somehow still being - or being perceived to be - legally tied to Gygax at the time in some way, meaning WotC felt they couldn't use the name but could use the underlying features? (legitimate question, I've no idea as to the answer)

Otherwise it makes no sense to use so many elements of a specific setting as examples without once naming the setting.

No, WotC ran a whole Greyhawk line of 2e products immediately before 3e, and as Campbell noted, they also published the 192 page 3.0 Living Greyhawk Gazetteer shortly after the 32 page 3.0 Gazetteer.

If you go to Alzrius's link on "Who is Erik Mona?" you can see WotC was internally divided on Greyhawk and the D&D world, with people who wanted 3e to be Greyhawk elements adapted to be generic D&D and people who wanted 3e default D&D world Greyhawk to be Greyhawk so you get a hidden default of not naming but using elements of Greyhawk as the D&D world straight out of the continuity of GH at the end of 2e. There are small differences like Heironeous's axe and Cuthbert's characterization/portfolio with his traditional LG castigation of backsliders turning into LN retribution.

Mostly these default D&D world setting elements were not big in the PH, mostly a selection of Greyhawk gods and the planar setup. No countries or NPCs (outside of the named spells that reference Greyhawk NPCs).

In things like Sword and Fist you get organizations like the Knight Protectors of the Great Kingdom that make more overt GH political element references including specific Greyhawk kingdom references.

Page 46:

 

[Maxperson]

That's why when I want lists of GH gods I use GH materials - the boxed set, From the Ashes, the later 90s stuff, and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer.


I think the reason that Greyhawk was used for the Living Greyhawk game is because otherwise it would be very poorly named!

I believe the word Greyhawk does not appear anywhere in the 3E PHB. It just presents the world of Dungeons & Dragons. As I've posted, when I want to understand how Boccob relates to worshippers I refer to my GH materials, not the irrelevant sideshow of the 3E DDG. (Which also does not contain the word Greyhawk.)

It doesn't matter if they use the name in the PHB or not. The default setting for 3e is Greyhawk which is why Living Greyhawk exists and not some other setting. But hey, I can't make you see it if you don't want to.

 

[pemerton]

Might this be due to the word "Greyhawk" somehow still being - or being perceived to be - legally tied to Gygax at the time in some way, meaning WotC felt they couldn't use the name but could use the underlying features? (legitimate question, I've no idea as to the answer)

No.

 

[pemerton]

Are there any Greyhawk/3e World of D&D elements in the PH or 3e DDG that you feel are inconsistent with GH?

Well, there are the ones that Erik Mona pointed out. (And as you have pointed to, the slightly awkward reconciliation of Heironeous's longsword in the LGG.) I'd have to go back and review further to see if there's anything else.

My assertion, though, is not that there is inconsistency. It's about the direction of causation and hence interpretation.

 

[Campbell]

There's way too much Planescape jingle jangle in mainline 3e for it to be a good source of Greyhawk info.