Greyhawk Q&A

[Nuke66]

there exists a greyhawk wiki

[Stonjuz]

Ive seen all of em and they are all very informative. I guess I was looking for one that is definitive of the original games in the Gygax house and such. Like I said, all of the websites are still informative. Thnx

[Nuke66]

Oh, I see, wanna power game...lol

Would like to know what to expect.

I guess you could always search for the .pdf's and read 'em

Personally, I rarely cheat, I know what module it is, but refrain from reading it, just cause.

Not that the whole situation isn't subject to DM tweaks in the first place, but sometimes we have been kinda stuck.

How that plays in a Con....well, couldn't tell yo.

[Stonjuz]

Im only concerned because Ive heard that Mr Kuntz gets a little short with players who dont know their stuff. Just trying to come in ready for his tabel. No matter how much I read, Ill still be the guy he cusses out. lol

[Vargr1105]

Unless "not knowing their stuff" involves ignorance of the game rules I don't see how this is an issue.

IMHO we are supposed to discover a setting by adventuring on it, not by reading vast PhD essays about it beforehand. That is one of the reasons I dislike Forgotten Realms as they stand now, there is simply too much stuff to absorb prior.

Sadly, the "read the encyclopedia beforehand" attitude seems to dominate FRPG these days. It ain't a real setting if you can't read pages upon pages of material before playing, right?

This is why Greyhawk, the original one before the wars and post-war period might seem odd to some folks. There really isn't that much cannon info about it on the sources. You start getting more data as time goes on from Dragon Magazine articles and from the modules. I actually prefer it like that and it was one of the traits of the setting that attracted me to it in the first place. I don't know that much about Oerth anyways, and won't bother to updated about a region until I go there.

Heck, most of what I know about its geography comes from looking at the map and reading a few GH Folio entries to know where to place Hardway Mountain (the one Stonjuz referred to earlier).

If I was Stonjuz I wouldn't bother going beyond reading the entries for his PC's land on Kuntz game. I would only ask the GM when the game is taking place chronologically. If it is during of after the GW Wars...well there's no way I'd be reading the whole "From the Ashes" boxed set, Kuntz better supply the info on his own adventure background.

[Recklessfireball]

Im only concerned because Ive heard that Mr Kuntz gets a little short with players who dont know their stuff. Just trying to come in ready for his tabel. No matter how much I read, Ill still be the guy he cusses out. lol

I don't think the guy will do that to you, Stonjuz (at least, he shouldn't).

On the other hand, if he does, just talk the flat of your hand and give him a slap to the chops. Should calm him right down.

[Stonjuz]

As far as Greyhawk is concerned, my game wont take you into any of those details.....
I asked Kuntz (on Dragonsfoot) for the name of our iuz djinn, to somehow legitimize my game.
He said he was unaware of ANY but he was GLAD someone wasnt trying to duplicate and wished us luck.
Im sure he would be pissed to hear of the goth humans inhabiting the 'north-central' Howling Hills now.

[Recklessfireball]

Im sure he would be pissed to hear of the goth humans inhabiting the 'north-central' Howling Hills now.

Hey, they probably integrate easier with cultures on Oerth, than they do in the real world.

[ragnboneshopper]

Im sure he would be pissed to hear of the goth humans inhabiting the 'north-central' Howling Hills now.

Hey, they probably integrate easier with cultures on Oerth, than they do in the real world.

Ha ha, right...

[Stonjuz]

The real test for this race would seem to be....how to keep their mascara from running in the middle of the day?

[ragnboneshopper]

Ha ha, we could make a fortune if we'd just convert from adventuring to selling Avon... any takers?

[Stonjuz]

Well, I got to play at Rob Kuntz's table.
I even made him shake his head in disbelief, while blinking in surprise, as he said, "What?", during my character description.
I was telling him about my human dwarf, a midget if you will. Graverobber, Tomb-Raider, Thief named Dewguud, with a Helm of Disguise.
(I actually took a bad-ass Halloween mask with me to donate to the EGG Jr. Benefit Auction)
It was one of my finest gaming moments......Shocking someone who has seen it all..... The look on his face......
I rolled horribly during the game, but ......we were being attacked by Snotlings or something.
I was being carried by an invisible flying party member. Disguised, I must have looked like a flying god to the snotlings.
But it still didnt stop em from trying to get us.......

[ragnboneshopper]

Sounds like you had a blast! One of these years, I'll get to GaryCon...

Heck, I'd just like to find a face to face gaming group that doesn't suck, ha ha!

[Stonjuz]

I was hoping to learn alot about Greyhawk's past from Rob. He seemed more interested in where it was going, rather than where it came from. Good for him, I say. He seemed quite concerned about how the game had evolved away from storytelling, and how it had modernized, fearing our game is losing something along the way.
I dont think he is very pleased with the new mmo video styles of gaming.
Again, he seemed rather worried about new players losing the storytelling aspect, from either ignorance or convienence.

[ragnboneshopper]

Yeah, I'm with him there. 3-4e became very influenced by MMOs and then Magic the Gathering, I think (big surprise). I've got nothing against MMOs and MTG, I've had a lot of fun playing the latter, but that's not DnD to me. One of the biggest differences, I've realized, is the change in initiative/rounds/turns after 2e. Going from minute-long abstract rounds to six-second slices of time on which one's "turn" takes place is a huge change. It places the emphasis on the individual as opposed to the party. Resource management becomes the focus of players, comparing what they can do with their characters to what other people can do with theirs, and picking from a menu of predefined options that get played like reruns every encounter. Very MMO-like, very imagination-squashing. I don't think people who've never played the old style can even conceive what they're missing, so they think guys like us are just coots jawing about the old days. It's like they think we're telling them to eat their brussel sprouts, but they don't realize we've got sweet ambrosia here...

Good for Rob for looking forward. It seems like a lot of the old school guys who saw the early days are doing that, which is great news!

[Vargr1105]

I was hoping to learn alot about Greyhawk's past from Rob. He seemed more interested in where it was going, rather than where it came from. Good for him, I say.

I disagree. The Greyhawk Wars and 3E really did a number on the setting. I am not claiming they were bad for it objectively, that depends on personal taste but it is undeniable the mood and themes of Greyhawk started veering in different directions from the original concept. If you (like me) want to get acquainted with the original and take it from there then this trend is aggravating. I dislike consulting the wikis and seeing all that different data from different editions with differing conceptions jumbled together without a clear deliniation of what belongs to where.

My main point of contention is the world map. It is hard enough to get acquainted with the politics and borders of a setting without having to study the equivalent of WW2 kicking the map over and re-drawing it. I also find it a waste of time having to learn what the Scarlet Brotherhood is, studying how they usurped several nations and were then kicked out from them one by one. WTFf? So much metaplot to end up in a status quo similar to teh original? I don't want to read about the metaplot, I want to play it. The Greyhawk Wars are even worse in this respect, instead of having multiple modules and campaign arcs you can actually play through during that chaotic period all we get is a wargame...lame.

Then there's the differences steeming from the different rule sets used for each chronological era, I am not referring to the actual in-game rule differences but the effect new stuff from new rules bleeding into a setting where it previously didn't exist and where it has no place.

For example: 2E Greyhawk has no assassins or half-orcs. 3E Greyhawk has dwarven wizards, halfling bersekers and half-demon swashbucklers. The Circle of Eight in 3E is chock-full of characters approaching Level 30, imagine my surprise when checking the stats for some of their members in "Mordekainen's Fantastic Adventure" (a 1E product) and discovering their original conceptions placed them at Level 12.

At which point can we draw a line a say: "this new conceptualization of the setting has flushed the original vision down the toilet?". Individual tastes might deem the new concept of GW much cooler, but the fact remains all that extra stuff, which then has an effect on the future chronology and events of the setting, is useless for people who prefer the original.

For me "where GW is going" is wherever people that play it want it to go in their individual campaigns. What system to use and where to pick it up in the chronology is anyone's choice; but it is evident taking on GW nearing 600 C.Y. and having to wade through almost 30 years of stuff piled on it by a multitude of different people and without input from the original designers is harder work than taking it from its 570's C.Y. roots and discovering it through the modules that were released back in the day.

What GW suffers today is a syndrome similar to what blights Forgotten Realms but on a much smaller scale: too much stuff, done by too many people, based on widely differing rulesets.

So this rant is just to say that I lament Rob is more interested in looking to the "future" of GW standing on that jumbled quagmire of info rather than sharing with us more of it's original intent and vision. If I had to take a bet I would say the most likely "official" future for Greyhawk, assuming there is one, will be advancing the chronology some 100 years and "clearing the landscape" so to speak, similar to what they did for Forgotten Realms in 4E. This is pretty typical in RPGs when the settings gets to fat, convoluted, complicated and sclerotic; the "rock falls, everyoen dies, dawn of a new day" trope.

I don't think people who've never played the old style can even conceive what they're missing, so they think guys like us are just coots jawing about the old days.

Which is factually wrong, of course. many of us are not old and never played the original editions "back in the day". Not to mention the new recruits coming along that started with 3E or 4E then got exposed to earlier editions and went trough a Holy Sh*t! epiphany-like moment. Heck, I had never played, ran or read AD&D1e until after the first decade of the 21st century. The usual bullcrap accusations of ageism, senility and nostalgia coming from the crowd that seems unable to enjoy their newer editions of choice without putting down others (a clear sign of lack of self-confidence and maturity) just roll off me like water from a impermeable jacket.

[ragnboneshopper]

So this rant is just to say that I lament Rob is more interested in looking to the "future" of GW standing on that jumbled quagmire of info rather than sharing with us more of it's original intent and vision. If I had to take a bet I would say the most likely "official" future for Greyhawk, assuming there is one, will be advancing the chronology some 100 years and "clearing the landscape" so to speak, similar to what they did for Forgotten Realms in 4E. This is pretty typical in RPGs when the settings gets to fat, convoluted, complicated and sclerotic; the "rock falls, everyoen dies, dawn of a new day" trope.

Yeah, I'm not as familiar with Greyhawk as with FR, but that seems to be what's happening with FR, so it wouldn't surprise me to see Greyhawk go the same way. It was interesting to see Ed Greenwood writing a few pieces on gnomes for the WotC website, which felt to me much more like the older material before the time of troubles. It felt like when gnomes were still gnomes, almost. I guess these things go through life cycles.

I don't think people who've never played the old style can even conceive what they're missing, so they think guys like us are just coots jawing about the old days.

Which is factually wrong, of course. many of us are not old and never played the original editions "back in the day". Not to mention the new recruits coming along that started with 3E or 4E then got exposed to earlier editions and went trough a Holy Sh*t! epiphany-like moment. Heck, I had never played, ran or read AD&D1e until after the first decade of the 21st century. The usual bullcrap accusations of ageism, senility and nostalgia coming from the crowd that seems unable to enjoy their newer editions of choice without putting down others (a clear sign of lack of self-confidence and maturity) just roll off me like water from a impermeable jacket. [/quote]

Yeah, I'm 35, so I'm definitely not an old coot, and my first exposure to DnD was the old school back in the late 80s-90s, definitely not the ground level of the 70s-80s (I was 3 in '74). I played Basic, some 1e, mostly DMed 2e but rarely got to play because of a lack of players, then dropped out at 3e. I was in love with the FR setting, but now not so much. Just sold my 4e books back to the game store, barely used, because my kids would rather play Swords and Wizardry and are starting to want some additional 1e complexity (my older three kids all have their own campaigns going, just amazing). I had picked up the 4e books on a whim about a year ago when I was getting my feet wet again, thinking hey, why not see how they're playing it now. Ha ha ha...

Along the same lines, I was just talking to one of the local hobby store guys who says they've dropped DnD Encounters play for now because no one was showing up the past two months with Next/5e on the horizon. 4e is pretty much done as far as he's concerned, but he's got AD&D games running twice a week, and Pathfinder of course. So I guess we're going through a Time of Troubles or Spellplague moment in the game, but maybe it's going back the other way. Will be interesting to see how things develop, I think, and if that's all Rob is anticipating, that makes sense to me from a designer's standpoint. Might as well be some folks thinking about the future who know the past, rather than what we've seen with folks designing something new that doesn't even recognize the past, or barely does so.

But I hear you, vargr: if I run any FR again, it will be pre-Time of Troubles, no doubt! Not going to mess with all the crap that happens later on. Start early in the setting and let the campaign develop where it wants to independent of the published shtuff. A campaign set should be a starting point. It's the merchandising craze that drives all of this excess, thank you George Lucas/Star Wars...

[Vargr1105]

I guess these things go through life cycles.

I think RPGs have been around long enough that we can say there seems to be a sort of natural law pointing that way. And this is hardly exclusive of D&D, you find the same trend in Vampire, Warhammer FRPG, Runequest, Traveller, etc. The funny is that the cycles seems to be becoming shorter each time. I must confess I am surprised at how fast 4E's lifecycle went; not that I am celebrating it just making note, and 5E cycle seems to be showing signs of decay even before the darn thing gets released.

and Pathfinder of course.

I'd like to try that one day. 3E isn't my thing but I have heard that PF has several diferences that may make it tolerable. And Paizo has all those nice adventure cycles, some even set in Greyhawk.

But I hear you, vargr: if I run any FR again, it will be pre-Time of Troubles, no doubt! Not going to mess with all the crap that happens later on.

I'd play that. What I have seen of AD&D1e FR pre-ToT seems interesting, it gives off a vibe of being AD&D's Middle Earth to Greyhawk's more Sword & Sorcery/Medieval feel.

Start early in the setting and let the campaign develop where it wants to independent of the published shtuff. A campaign set should be a starting point. It's the merchandising craze that drives all of this excess, thank you George Lucas/Star Wars...

Indeed. As I've alluded before my biggest gripe with the merchandising/metaplot/chronology forward skit is the fact that it always seems to happen off-screen via supplements and novels, and you don't get to even play through it. Ok granted, the Time of Troubles did have a trilogy of adventures...I think but that is the exception, not the rule.

[Stonjuz]

Greyhawks percieved 'low magic': Possible explanation?
Greyhawk's 'low magic' status probably stems from its beginning in Chainmail days. As the players began adventuring, (and stretching the game, still in its infancy, away from historical miniatures), the magics were unveiled, upon discoveries. Im no expert, (believe that) but I would venture to say that the 1970s players did not feel they were magic starved at all, until FR took over. I would imagine that nearly ALL of the early tables were having fun finding the latest and greatest spells and stuff.
Later, as I see it, Forgotten Realms (and subsequent systems) stories were drawn up with the magic stuff inherent (i assume most of the adventures were usually based totally around such magics).
The more I type here, the more I realize that I have no clue on what D&D should be. I only know what I like.
I personally prefer a 'mid level of magics'. Somewhere between Chainmail (few to none) and MtG Dominion (or Pokemon, lol).
Abundant and plentiful, but not in EVERYONES hands.
Cluemiester's abundance of magic is an obvious exeption. The retiring adventurer (from the original setting) would surely have a stash acquired. I tried to show that Gryehawk does have the magic flowing, but only the brave (or the lucky) will find it.
Having found the Greyhawk renaissance(spelling?) of late, I wanted to try this game here. I am afraid that I/we will just barely scratch the surface before it stops.

[Vargr1105]

Greyhawks percieved 'low magic': Possible explanation?

I do not think it is perceived, I think it's actual. I'd say your analysis of an increasing magic commonality in the game is probably correct. Further, I get the impression from what I know of FR (which is sort of the inheritor setting from GW in TSR history) that in that setting magical items that strike me as unique or conceived as having very few examples in existence (Frostbrand swords, etc) become "types" in that setting.

The more I type here, the more I realize that I have no clue on what D&D should be. I only know what I like.

That might mean you do have a clue on what D&D is about.

This is one of "the issues" between the "old" and the "new". When we think about it there is nothing stopping an AD&D game from emulating the more recent stuff with just a few tweaks. We can can ramp up HPs, allowing full multiclassing at will, insert the Feat system, get rid of the -10 AC limit and use ascending AC, let Clerics have spontaneous casting for healing spells, do away with race/class limitations and demihuman level limits, etc, etc all the way up to having halfings that shoot laser beams from their eyes and flying elves...or whatever. Oh, and most folks aren't aware of this but AD&D1e has am official "Hero Point" system that allows you to go Conan or Elric on the arse of your enemies.

But the reverse isn't that easy. To use newer editions in an AD&D-esque form yould would have to nerf the systems beyond what they are designed to accommodate; and they are so intricately designed and streamlined that you could end up with a rubik's cube effect, fiddle to much with one aspect and you unbalance another too much. E.g. if you get rid of something as simple as Attacks of Oppurtunity in 3E you invalidate a whole slew of Feats, monster designs and even whole Prestige Classes.

What I am trying to say is that classical D&D is more versatile and malleable than recent D&D, so it is a bit daft to point out "this is what it is supposed to be". If anything it is a platform that you can use for your own preferred playstyle. With the newer ones its different, by design and self-admitted by their creators it lends itself to a X or Y playstyle. It is revealing that 3E had entire supplements (as thick as the rulebooks themselves) from both WotC and 3rd parties that offered bundles alternate rules for different playstyles. There is nothing comparable for AD&D before Players Options came around, it was expected that individual users would make whatever personal customizations they wished. Even Ravenloft, a setting that is designed for the very specific playstyle of gothic horror only has a few new system mechanics that can fit in one page or two.

I tried to show that Gryehawk does have the magic flowing, but only the brave (or the lucky) will find it.

Greyhawk has over 1000 years of civilized history starting with two civilizations that blew each other up using Magical Weapons of Mass Destruction. It is likely civilization existed for just as much or more before that. Even if magical items production is considerably rare, the vast course of history means there will be considerable caches of stuff to be found. And there are some remarkably powerful magical and technological Artifacts here and there.

But this is much different from the "McDonaldization" of items in 3E where a magician of Level X with Y gold coins worth of substance Z and Feat W could whip out a magical sword in Q amount of time.
I remember seeing folks playing 3E Living Greyhawk at UK cons who had already pre-planned from character generation what magical goodies their characters would be building as soon as they got the minimum level and money necessary. I can't fault them, they were playing the game better than me because that is what it was designed for, but to my subjective tastes that felt like killing the magic of the game, not bringing it forward.

Compare that to what I read in the old BD&D Rules Cyclopedia where it is recommended that would-be crafting wizards should undertake quests (adventures!) to slay mighty beasts and acquire the rare ingredients they assume after diligent research will allow them to make a nifty magical sword or wand.

3E has rules for the probabilities of finding magic shops in any given community, the type of items found there and how much magical loot it can buy from a party. In Greyhawk AD&D1e there is, to my knowledge, a single magic shop in Greyhawk City which is one of the largest metropolises of the setting and definitively the most cosmopolitan.

You know, the more I think about it, the more I feel the greatest similarity between AD&D and xE D&D is the use of the acronym. These differences aren't bad per se as they obviously cater to different consumer markets that are out thre, but the title-sharing and the active suppression WotC inflicted upon AD&D/BD&D until very recently has led to a lot of confusion. The whole "edition wars" bull is more about folks mistaking apples with oranges coupled with corporate malfeasance than anything of substance.

I still laugh a bit when I hear of 3E "grognards" and 4E "young'uns" bitching with each other these days. the more things change, he?