Greyhawk & Forgotten Realms: Basic Similarities?

[AFGNCAAP]

Though this topic may be deemed blasphemous to some, I was thinking about two of the more standard, well-entrenched D&D settings out there, & I couldn't help but think of some of the core similarities of the settings. I'm not talking about mechanics & what not, but basic concepts that both share. For example:

* The uber-wizard: GH has Mordenkainen, & FR has Elminster. Very powerful & well-known in their home settings.

* The uber-dungeon/ruin: GH has the infamous Castle Greyhawk, while either Myth Drannor or Undermountain can qualify for FR.

* The mad mage (tie in to uber-dungeon): GH has Zagyg, who's got a strong link to Castle Greyhawk; FR has Halaster, the mad architect of Undermountain.

* The uber-city: GH has, well, Greyhawk; FR's Waterdeep fits the bill here. These seem to be Lankhmar-esque cities, full of intrigue, secret societies, & magic.

* A potluck pantheon: Both GH & FR have pantheons of deities that are seem to be a collective of bits & pieces rather than belonging to one cohesive pantheon (something sort of resembling the representation of faiths in Lankhmar, as well).

* The evil nation: GH has Iuz, & FR has Zhentil Keep--both are evil political powers controled or driven by an evil theocracy of sorts (Iuz is ruled by, well, Iuz; the power of Zhentil Keep is just about inseperable from the Church of Bane).

I'm sure that there are even more if you think about it. Now, keep in mind I'm more or less looking at rather basic similarities, since details can flesh out things differently (though the core concept remains the same). And, I'm sure these elements can be tied to other settings & sources as well (Mordor = Zhentil Keep & Iuz; Gandalf = Mordenkainen & Elminster; Mines of Moria = Undermountain & Castle Greyhawk; etc.).

Agree? Disagree? Additonal points? Counterpoints? What do you think?

 

[Davelozzi]

Both have fans who will make this thread go down in flames.

Seriously, though, you're right, but most of those things are just natural outgrowths of a fantasy world built around D&D.

 

[Grazzt]

Both have fans who will make this thread go down in flames.

That's the first thing I thought of when I started reading this thread. I take that back, the FIRST thing I thought of was "Well, they're both for D&D."

 

[Henry]

Yep, that pretty much describes the majority of Modern Fantasy for the past 25 years. Though I've not read them all, I have a strong feeling many of these same themes exist in the other influences of D&D (Jack Vance's Dying Earth series, Moorcock's Elric Chronicles, Leiber's Newhon materials, Howard's Conan,etc.) I KNOW the Leiber and Howard connections are there - Conan put down more than one dark sorcerer or priest in his journeys across Hyboria, and sneaked for loot into more than one forbidden stronghold or tower.

 

[Greyhack]

* The uber-wizard: GH has Mordenkainen, & FR has Elminster. Very powerful & well-known in their home settings.

This is, IMO, only a very shallow surface comparison. Mordenkainen is staunchly neutral, very behind the scenes, and completely within the realm of "balanced" NPCs. Elminster has a definite goodly bent, is a very on the scenes figure, and is excessively munchkin. When you and a small handful of NPCs are so powerful that prestige classes and feats (which the FRCS recommends not letting the PCs have) have to be created to justify you, well, you might be a munchkin...

* The mad mage (tie in to uber-dungeon): GH has Zagyg, who's got a strong link to Castle Greyhawk; FR has Halaster, the mad architect of Undermountain.

Again, only a thin surface comparison. Zagyg built Castle Greyhawk to live and work in. Being an odd chap, he filled it with lots of craziness that gives adventurers headaches.

Halaster built his dungeon, from what I can tell, with the sole purpose of it being a playground for adventurers.

Zagyg no longer has anything to do with his Castle, he's moved on. Halaster hangs around and purposely "Dungeon Masters" Undermountain.

 

[Estlor]

If you think about it in the terms that both started out as campaign settings for their respective creators' games (and that many of the best-known NPCs were PCs in that world at some point in time), some of these similarities make sense.

For example, in the dungeon delve day of D&D (how's that for alliteration?), you'd want to base your campaign around a city, then have a good dungeon nearby. Now, if that dungeon just happens to get bigger and bigger with a ramping up of power along the way, all the better as you get more mileage out of it. But, sooner or later, you're going to need to move beyond the dungeon, and to do that perhaps it would be nice to find the person that built the daggon thing. And based on the hoops you have to jump through to find him, he just HAS to be a mad wizard. Hey, it was the mindset of 70s/80s D&D. It trickled down too. Recall Bargle at the end of that little demo dungeon, and the fact that the solo quest included in the book took you BACK into the same dungeon all over again.

 

[diaglo]

* The uber-dungeon/ruin: GH has the infamous Castle Greyhawk, while either Myth Drannor or Undermountain can qualify for FR.

there are several uber-dungeons in GH. most are covered in the Underdark. edit: not a book. but several modules.

* The uber-city: GH has, well, Greyhawk; FR's Waterdeep fits the bill here. These seem to be Lankhmar-esque cities, full of intrigue, secret societies, & magic.

and just how uber is Greyhawk. my 1edADnD folio wouldn't even make it qualify as a town by modern day standards. whereas Waterdeep (not even the largest city on Aber-Toril) is almost the population of the Great Kingdom.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

and just how uber is Greyhawk. my 1edADnD folio wouldn't even make it qualify as a town by modern day standards. whereas Waterdeep (not even the largest city on Aber-Toril) is almost the population of the Great Kingdom.

It's gotten quite more uber. I don't know the numbers, but I remember people complaining that the population somehow skyrocketed between 1E and 3E with little rhyme or reason.

 

[AFGNCAAP]

Yep, that pretty much describes the majority of Modern Fantasy for the past 25 years. Though I've not read them all, I have a strong feeling many of these same themes exist in the other influences of D&D (Jack Vance's Dying Earth series, Moorcock's Elric Chronicles, Leiber's Newhon materials, Howard's Conan,etc.) I KNOW the Leiber and Howard connections are there - Conan put down more than one dark sorcerer or priest in his journeys across Hyboria, and sneaked for loot into more than one forbidden stronghold or tower.

I have to agree--I think a fair amount of these common elements, to some degree or another, exist in the pre-existing literature of the time. Not all of them exist in every source, but it does feel that more "default" D&D settings like Greyhawk & Forgotten Realms incorporates a lot of them.

And I do know that, if you really examine the comparisons made, then they will be different. However, what I'm suggesting is that if you look at the general core concept of these elements, leaving out the details, there are a good number of similarities.

Just to reaffirm a point: this thread is not, in any way, shape, form, or intent, meant to serve as kindling for a flame war. It's just meant for a discussion of examining recurrent themes and concepts in D&D games, mainly referring to 2 of the big settings for that game (GH & FR).

Though IRL a lot of the major cities are next to some body of water, Greyhawk & Waterdeep, to a degree, hearken back to Leiber's Lankhmar--a coastal city-state that contained countless cultures and oddities of Nehwon.

The mix-&-match pantheons of FR & GH also hearken back to Lankhmar--where the Street of the Gods hosts countless faiths from various lands. The roots & mythological structure that the faith's deity is a part of aren't delved into, either. Aarth, Kos, Mog the Spider-God, Death, Issek of the Jug, Hate, the Red God, Skama, Tyaa, and Ilthmar's Rat God are all Nehwon's gods, though they aren't part of the same mythology, nor do they come from the same cultures.

The benevolent (or at least non-malevolent) powerful wizard isn't new either. Merlin is a great example, though he is an advisor to the king (Azoun & Vangerdahast (sp?) matched the Arthur-Merlin template). Gandalf is the prime example of the independant wizard who helps the heroes, though Leiber's Sheelba of the Eyeless Face & Ningauble of the Seven Eyes also fit the bill (though, like Mordenkainen, there aren't necessarily "good"). Ursula K. LeGuin's Ged/Sparrowhawk also fits the bill.

As for the "nation of evil," Mordor is the most obvious source. I'm not just talking about an enemy nation, who may or may not be "evil," per se, but truly evil. Mordor was controlled by Sauron, much like Iuz rules Iuz.

What of the tomb, ruin, dungeon, or underground realm, the "underworld"? Tolkien had the Mines of Moria; Ged faced the Tombs of Atuan; Lankhmar Below with its rat hordes threatened Lankhmar above, while Quarmall (from "The Lords of Quarmall") was a wicked, decadent underground realm where various nobles foguht for power (sorta sounds like the drow, in a way). Along those lines, there is the endless Underdark, Undermountain, & the dungeons of Castle Greyhawk, at least.

But, though these sources may have some of the elements, IIRC, they don't necessary have all of them like D&D does. Middle-Earth has the evil nation, the "underworld," and the wandering wizard, but doesn't really have the "worldly" city-state with its thieves' guild. Middle-Earth's cosmology is a single, well-connected mythos, not the mix-&-match of various gods, deified mortals, infernal/otherworldly beings, and worshipped dead found in the pulp sword-&-sorcery fantasy of Leiber & Howard. Nehwon has the "worldly" city-state of Lankhmar, the "underworld" of Quarmall, and the independant wizards Sheelba & Ningauble, but it doesn't really have the "evil nation." Neither Leiber or Howard's works contain nations of elves, dwarves, or the like, but then again, Tolkien's work isn't rife with hidden, "forgotten," exotic tribes or folk.

IMHO, D&D does have all of these things, mashed together into one: the "worldly/decadent" metropolis; the "evil nation"; the powerful, independent, helpful wizard; the "underworld"; the evil mage/priest; the demihuman nations; the hidden, exotic races; the hodge-podge of gods; the thieves' guild; & countless other elements. Both of them even have histories of great & powerful nations, magical ones at that (IIRC), which collapsed: FR with Netheril, & GH with Suel & the Rain of Colorless Fire (a popular historical event for settings, too--DL had the Cataclysm, while Scarred Lands has the Titanswar).

Yet, the key thing is that D&D doesn't necesssarily have to have it this way. FR could have easily had elves without an Evermeet or elven courts. It could have not had Elminster. It could have had a single, unified, well-integrated pantheon of deities. Along the same lines, Greyhawk could have easily not have had the nation of Iuz. It could have not had a Thieves' Guild in Greyhawk. It could have not had the deified Iuz or St. Cuthbert.

Of course, not all settings for D&D fit this mold (obviously), but 2 of the most popular settings and, dare I say, most identified with D&D, do fit this mold.

I'm sure popularity has a lot to do with it, but still, why the similar core elements? Couldn't FR have proven to be just as popular, if not more so, than GH without the similarities?

Just wondering. Like I said, this thread isn't intended to fan flames or enflame passions, but just note similarities.

 

[DanMcS]

and just how uber is Greyhawk. my 1edADnD folio wouldn't even make it qualify as a town by modern day standards. whereas Waterdeep (not even the largest city on Aber-Toril) is almost the population of the Great Kingdom.

Greyhawk is darn huge, according to the city of greyhawk boxed set. There wasn't any scale on the poster map that I can remember. There was a typo in the description section of the book that referred to the main road as being a mile WIDE. They meant long, probably, because it stretched across most of the map, but it was only about a centimeter wide. If the map was to-scale, and you take that description literally (being 8 or 9 at the time, I was wont to do so), whoa.