Would a campaign set in Greyhawk...

[Mort]

No, not at all.

1. I like Greyhawk, heck I'm running in it right now.

2. Group dynamic and the DM matters (to me) much more than the setting.

 

[Greg K]

If you are basing on the original folio or original boxed set I would be in depending upon other factors (e.g., the other players, play style, house rules, supplemental material used). If you are basing it on From the Ashes or later, I probably would not be interested.

 

[DeanP]

I love Greyhawk, so it wouldn't deter me.

 

[Yaarel]

Greyhawk.

Regarding Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 1e, the official setting is the one that the DM invents. Homebrew. Everything else is suggestions and inspiration − and a mess that requires homebrew to make sense of.

Greyhawk is something else. Greyhawk is an intellectual challenge to see if it is possible to use every suggestion that TSR ever published, and fit it into a single setting − somehow, somewhere. The end result is a mixed success. But interesting. It also defines an era, maybe sorta like a cd of the musical hits across a particular decade.

I think you can ‘sell’ Greyhawk as old-school D&D, so that new players can get a sense of the origins of the D&D game. How it all started.

On the one hand, Greyhawk is less my setting of choice. There were ‘suggestions’ during the TSR era that I prefer to ignore.

On the other hand, there is a mood of ‘anything goes’. Players can build almost any kind character concept − and it *will* fit somehow somewhere. So players have alot of latitude.

So. If I am a player, I am cool with Greyhawk. Because I know if there is some customization that is important for the character concept, it will probably work out well in the context of Greyhawk.

This abundance of player empowerment (!) makes Greyhawk an appealing setting.

 

[Prakriti]

Greyhawk is not my first choice for campaign settings, but it's waaaaaay ahead of homebrew. Too many GMs get over-involved in their world and expect their players to share their enthusiasm. I'd rather that creativity went toward creating rich stories and characters in an existing setting.

 

[cbwjm]

I find the setting a little dull but it wouldn't dissuade me from playing since it is less the setting and more the DM and there adventures that makes the game interesting.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

Whew! Thanks for all the replies to my silly question. I have to remember not to post questions on no sleep for 48 hours. Heh.

 

[Laurefindel]

The way I see it, it's the DM that makes or break the game; not the setting. If Greyhawk is a setting that you, as a DM, love, know and can run comfortably, then I would gladly join your game, even if it isn't a setting I'd be going for myself.

 

[Olive]

Greyhawk is not my first choice for campaign settings, but it's waaaaaay ahead of homebrew. Too many GMs get over-involved in their world and expect their players to share their enthusiasm. I'd rather that creativity went toward creating rich stories and characters in an existing setting.

I've never heard anyone object to homebrewed worlds as a matter of principle before. I kind of know what you mean however (and I'm exclusively a homebrew GM).

 

[Doc_Klueless]

In my youth, I was known to fall in love with my homebrew and write up reams of stuff about it. None of my players could have given a crap. Heh.