What didn't people like about Gygax's Greyhawk?

[pawsplay]

Yuck, you eat those in the morning?

Only if the gods love you.

 

[3catcircus]

The fact that despite them being the central features of the setting we never got a detailed treatment of either Greyhawk City or Greyhawk Castle.

How do you figure? TSR released both a City of Greyhawk boxed set and a Ruins of Greyhawk adventure (which was serious, unlike Castle Greyhawk). Are you referring to them being released after he left TSR? Or that they were never were provided?

 

[ColonelHardisson]

How do you figure? TSR released both a City of Greyhawk boxed set and a Ruins of Greyhawk adventure (which was serious, unlike Castle Greyhawk). Are you referring to them being released after he left TSR? Or that they were never were provided?

Gygax had nothing to do with either of them. As a fan of Gygax's work at that time, I had been waiting for years to see him work on both. His name would have had to be on them both for them to be what I was waiting for. They weren't bad, mind you; I still like the City boxed set. It just wasn't Gygax's work.

 

[S'mon]

Trouble with the late '80s 2e Greyhawk City box set was it started the general move away from plausibly medieval looking fantasy city maps (compare 1e Lankhmar map, or the City State of the Invincible Overlord), towards the sort of sparse, suburban 'garden city' look of modern American cities, that makes no sense within a medieval paradigm where every square inch within the city walls is at a premium. I'd put this down to a general decline in cultural & historical knowledge among US game designers, not something one could ever accuse EGG of.

The worst example I possess is the 3e scenario "Three Days to Kill", where 'Deep Town', a small mountain town, covers a hex (!) three miles across (!!). *ugh*

 

[Darrin Drader]

In all honesty, Gygaxian names were enough to drive me away from Greyhawk. I just couldn't take the place seriously, and at the time there was this other setting coming to light that seemed a little more refined in its approach to naming, among other things. Little known world called the Forgotten Realms. I wonder if anyone ever did anything with it.

 

[GrumpyOldMan]

That big lake, next to Greyhawk City. It's emptied by two rivers. Surely thats a geographical impossibility. That always bugged me.

 

[Le Noir Faineant]

My impression of early Greyhawk was that Mr Gygax was a good adventure designer, in the old-school, dungeon-heavy sense of the word, but less a storyteller.

Old Greyhawk IMO lacks a bit of coherence and of the epic feel other setting transmit (like WL), and, while it gets a lot through the superb modules that were written for it, I personally find it less usable for my homebrew campaigns. For that, the Wilderlands or Mystara are much more usable, except if one builds on existing modules.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

In all honesty, Gygaxian names were enough to drive me away from Greyhawk. I just couldn't take the place seriously, and at the time there was this other setting coming to light that seemed a little more refined in its approach to naming, among other things. Little known world called the Forgotten Realms. I wonder if anyone ever did anything with it.

I vastly prefer Gygaxian naming conventions over that of the Realms. Hearing names that end in "dale" or names like Waterdeep or Silverymoon sets my teeth on edge.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

But were there things that you did not like along the way (up until his resignation from TSR), be it product material or related articles?

Its unobtainability. In the days before web stores and mail order I don't remember ever seeing it for sale anywhere. Certainly wasn't around by the time I was actually DMing and interested in having a copy. I'd probably still have a Greyhawk game going today. By the time it was available to me somewhere I no longer had any real interest in it as it had been replaced by other settings and homebrews. I eventually got the box (or what was left of it) second hand from a former player/DM and in my ignorance at THAT time I sold it, IIRC, along with virtually ALL my 2E crap.

 

[SWBaxter]

Trouble with the late '80s 2e Greyhawk City box set was it started the general move away from plausibly medieval looking fantasy city maps (compare 1e Lankhmar map, or the City State of the Invincible Overlord), towards the sort of sparse, suburban 'garden city' look of modern American cities, that makes no sense within a medieval paradigm where every square inch within the city walls is at a premium. I'd put this down to a general decline in cultural & historical knowledge among US game designers, not something one could ever accuse EGG of.

Perhaps not, but OTOH I don't really think Greyhawk shows much evidence of such knowledge being applied. Hommlet, for example, doesn't look much like a medieval farming village. In fact, the first D&D "towns" I ever mapped out followed the general layout of the various neighbourhoods where I and my friends lived, with interesting stuff adapted or filled in, and I always figured Hommlet was built the same way since it looked a lot like my maps. Add some two-car garages and it could easily be a modern semi-rural community. From that point of view, the City of Greyhawk box set fits right in to established practice.

Hmm, now I have this strange desire to run T1 as a d20 Modern adventure...