|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 13, 2018 22:58:33 GMT -5
Another thread got me to thinking what an actual OD&D or Classic D&D campaign set in Greyhawk would be like. With the AD&D influences removed and a maybe a focus on the wargaming roots of D&D the setting would almost have to feel different. Classic modules like ToEE and Slavers could have a different tone and if one used the old Great Kingdom* and Blackmoor maps (Finally putting the two back together as God intended) the world gets a makeover and the focus is narrowed. As much as I love the published setting I feel we did loose some things from the transition. We have a few stories but no real feel of the world as it was in the pre and early D&D games. I keep thinking that Greyhawk belongs to D&D and not AD&D just like Blackmoor and the Wilderlands do. I do not feel I am the only one that would be interested in extracting or finding the OD&D 'Hawk to see how the setting evolved. I also tend to feel GH and BM discussions retread too much ground and we keep missing the early campaign building and DIY attitude of the game. Whether for actual play or reference I think exploring this would be a worthy topic. *Attached is one of the original Great Kingdom maps. From what I can tell this was the heart of Greyhawk at one point.  |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Oct 14, 2018 9:25:50 GMT -5
As much as I would love seeing an OD&D Greyhawk, I feel a little like we are chasing unicorns. Still I would love to see the effort, that and the original Blackmoor. Wouldn't it be awesome to find detailed instructions of those bygone eras Hopefully there is a class A treasure buried somewhere, it's nice to dream.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Borak on Oct 14, 2018 11:36:34 GMT -5
Sounds like a doable project to me, quite a bit of work, but rewarding in the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 14, 2018 13:37:42 GMT -5
As much as I would love seeing an OD&D Greyhawk, I feel a little like we are chasing unicorns. Still I would love to see the effort, that and the original Blackmoor. Wouldn't it be awesome to find detailed instructions of those bygone eras Hopefully there is a class A treasure buried somewhere, it's nice to dream. If the documents exist I am sure they are buried in someone's storage unit or held by a certain company who chases monuments. That said, we are all perfectly capable of cobbling together something from what we already know. There are Q&A threads, articles that have been scanned and distributed and are available. It would take work but with that and some reasonable gap filling we can get something that is doable. For example, let's assume that the original box and Greyhawk was 80% close to the rules used. You have a mechanical basis for the game already. Blackmoor poses a bit of a difficulty as the supplement was, as history has shown, cobbled together from various things. Extracting Dave's stuff could be a bit harder but again doable. When you add in the FFC from Judges Guild you can get an idea of how it was run on Dave's end. What would remain is filling in gaps and smoothing over inconsistencies. For fluff there is a bit more of a problem as info is sparse and scattered. But again, ideas can be gleaned from articles and what was published in the early days. For Blackmoor the FFC is again a decent source but, Greyhawk can only be found in anecdotal tales. I would also suspect that the worlds at the table were a whole lot less developed than we realize. Additions were made for publishing and when that became the baseline I have heard and suspect that players in a few of the campaigns wanted that baseline at their table...kind of a self feeding cycle. So where does that leave me and us? I imagine it like this...I am playing in this new game and want to run my own. I am given a notebook with the base rules and maybe some world information to start with. I am carved out a place in the overall setting to run my games in. Outside of a few calls and letters for clarification filling the gaps in the rules and the setting are my own. Some of the other players and DMs get together to make things more consistent with their parts but it is all loose knit. In some cases this is what the Greyhawk Folio and the FFC did but on a larger scale. Personally, I think reconstruction can happen but it will never be full and unless you want to fill in a lot of gaps you will always move beyond what was originally developed. I see it more as a way to get in the head of the designers to help build our worlds rather than a full setting. Although extracting a foundation can create a place to run campaigns in the older styles. My core thought is this: if we can get to what these settings looked like in their Ur-Form and discover some of the thinking behind them, we could build better OD&D settings more true to the spirit of the game than we have in the past. I know looking into this before improved the basics of my own work and has helped refine what I do. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 14, 2018 23:39:46 GMT -5
I think looking at the old Strategic Review and Alarums & Excursions that might have any Greyhawk articles ( bravewolf you write for them do you know of any such articles?). Then there is the Gary Gygax Greyhawk forum at DF that could give hints as well. I am all for trying to piece together a ur-Greyhawk from those sources. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 15, 2018 1:38:45 GMT -5
I think looking at the old Strategic Review and Alarums & Excursions that might have any Greyhawk articles ( bravewolf you write for them do you know of any such articles?). Then there is the Gary Gygax Greyhawk forum at DF that could give hints as well. I am all for trying to piece together a ur-Greyhawk from those sources. I will look at the A&E issues that I have but I doubt that Greyhawk will make much of a showing even in early issues. Gygax didn't exactly endear himself to the A&E readership with his denegration of amateur publications. Also, most contributors then - even moreso than currently - ran their own settings. To estimate the yield of Greyhawk data from A&E, I recommend that you pop over to RPGGeek.com and see whether Patrick Zoch has taken his indexing project to the early issues. It isn't as detailed as my Arduin abstracts from A&E, but Patrick IDs the game systems discussed in each issue and might mention major discussuon topics, too. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 15, 2018 2:05:35 GMT -5
I took a quick look at the information available on RPGGeek and it does not look like indexing has caught up to the ealy issues of A&E. I'll look at my personal collection this week and get back to you here.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 15, 2018 2:15:50 GMT -5
The Strategic Review II(2) (1976) mentions Greyhawk on pages 3 and 23. Page 3 just indicates that the magic system changes in Supplement 1: Greyhawk, were intended to reduce the power of magic-users vid-a-vis magic items somewhat. Page 23 states how many years the GH and BM campaigns had been running, as well as the maximum PC level at that time (nobody above 14th level).
Not much in that issue!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 15, 2018 18:12:30 GMT -5
I think looking at the old Strategic Review and Alarums & Excursions that might have any Greyhawk articles ( bravewolf you write for them do you know of any such articles?). Then there is the Gary Gygax Greyhawk forum at DF that could give hints as well. I am all for trying to piece together a ur-Greyhawk from those sources. There were a few other articles (the source escapes me) that talked more about setting up the campaign and some dungeon levels. It has some info on technique but that's about it. I remember on his Q&A he went into more detail on the setting concerning the North America map, and a few of the domains. I don't remember much as there was tension between him trying to push LA and those wanting AD&D and discussion on published Greyhawk. There were a few asking about the original setting but it was based around the castle IIRC. There may be more bits there as I have not searched them in awhile. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 15, 2018 21:31:08 GMT -5
I think looking at the old Strategic Review and Alarums & Excursions that might have any Greyhawk articles ( bravewolf you write for them do you know of any such articles?). Then there is the Gary Gygax Greyhawk forum at DF that could give hints as well. I am all for trying to piece together a ur-Greyhawk from those sources. There were a few other articles (the source escapes me) that talked more about setting up the campaign and some dungeon levels. It has some info on technique but that's about it. I remember on his Q&A he went into more detail on the setting concerning the North America map, and a few of the domains. I don't remember much as there was tension between him trying to push LA and those wanting AD&D and discussion on published Greyhawk. There were a few asking about the original setting but it was based around the castle IIRC. There may be more bits there as I have not searched them in awhile. Gygax's article, "How to Set up a D&D Campaign" is in the zine Europa, issues 6-8. Here is a link to those issues, Mr Darke: www.whiningkentpigs.com/DW/oldzines/europa6-8.pdf. It starts on PDF p. 20 and some particulars of Old Castle Greyhawk are mentioned starting on p. 21. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Oct 15, 2018 23:39:58 GMT -5
OD&D & AD&D, these are the same systems. One can run AD&D as bare-bones as you want to and nobody can tell. Am I the only person who could care less what the manuals say? I ignore system data just as liberally, supplementing published frameworks for my own.
Just work Blackmoor back in, and done! What am I missing here? The only accurate map is the one that you are looking at at the time. I don't believe in a hard setting, I don't think that it would be any more entertaining (frustrating) than any other core setting where the DM refuses to make it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 16, 2018 2:25:08 GMT -5
OD&D & AD&D, these are the same systems. One can run AD&D as bare-bones as you want to and nobody can tell. Am I the only person who could care less what the manuals say? I ignore system data just as liberally, supplementing published frameworks for my own. Just work Blackmoor back in, and done! What am I missing here? The only accurate map is the one that you are looking at at the time. I don't believe in a hard setting, I don't think that it would be any more entertaining (frustrating) than any other core setting where the DM refuses to make it up. That's all fine and good. On the other hand, I get something of the nature of Mr Darke's exercise here (I think) because I am doing the same thing with Arduin. There are several iterations of Arduin rules, of which I favor a particular permutation. For me, however, the exact rules involved are merely a vehicle for the exploration and enjoyment of another person's world, and running it as I see fit. There is no great purism in this endeavor. Rather, I sought - and perhaps the OP seeks - a suitable baseline from which to explore the setting of choice at a specific time/configuration. Maybe what you're "missing" is the draw of running GH in its earliest form or don't feel the need to cut out AD&D influences because of its evolution from OD&D (indeed, Supplement 1 presaged much of what went into AD&D). That's a feature of your referee style, not a bug - as is that of the OP. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 16, 2018 3:14:33 GMT -5
I think looking at the old Strategic Review and Alarums & Excursions that might have any Greyhawk articles ( bravewolf you write for them do you know of any such articles?). Then there is the Gary Gygax Greyhawk forum at DF that could give hints as well. I am all for trying to piece together a ur-Greyhawk from those sources. Check out A&E #2; it has a letter from EGG that details the development of OD&D. I don't have this issue, so I can't vouch for its usefulness. Issues 8, 15, 20, 100, & 300 also have EGG contributions but I don't have those issues or a good summary of what those letters contained. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 16, 2018 10:53:06 GMT -5
OD&D & AD&D, these are the same systems. One can run AD&D as bare-bones as you want to and nobody can tell. Am I the only person who could care less what the manuals say? I ignore system data just as liberally, supplementing published frameworks for my own. Just work Blackmoor back in, and done! What am I missing here? The only accurate map is the one that you are looking at at the time. I don't believe in a hard setting, I don't think that it would be any more entertaining (frustrating) than any other core setting where the DM refuses to make it up. That's all fine and good. On the other hand, I get something of the nature of Mr Darke's exercise here (I think) because I am doing the same thing with Arduin. There are several iterations of Arduin rules, of which I favor a particular permutation. For me, however, the exact rules involved are merely a vehicle for the exploration and enjoyment of another person's world, and running it as I see fit. There is no great purism in this endeavor. Rather, I sought - and perhaps the OP seeks - a suitable baseline from which to explore the setting of choice at a specific time/configuration. Maybe what you're "missing" is the draw of running GH in its earliest form or don't feel the need to cut out AD&D influences because of its evolution from OD&D (indeed, Supplement 1 presaged much of what went into AD&D). That's a feature of your referee style, not a bug - as is that of the OP. More than anything this is a thought exercise to help with my own designs and to maybe run a game of D&D set in Greyhawk and Blackmoor as close to the earliest versions as possible. I zeroed in on the first two settings as they felt like a good place to start. As well, I do see major difference in D&D and AD&D which made me curious what a D&D Greyhawk/Blackmoor would look like. Again a thought exercise more than anything. However, in both cases the theoretical must move to practical execution or we are just navel gazing. Finally, no one said that making things up would be disallowed. In fact, we are in agreement that reasonable gap filling will be needed. As far a rules and setting goes;perhaps it is my career or mindset but having a set baseline whether for rules consistency or starting points, some form of this is needed. The G part of RPG is game. Games have rules that must be consistent and applied consistently. While it may not be how Gygax and Arenson played it is how I play which is what really matters. This is wholly my part of the exercise but I make no excuses for my philosophy. |
|
|
|
Post by El Borak on Oct 16, 2018 11:45:08 GMT -5
The El Raja Key Archive by Rob Kuntz has Greyhawk stuff on it including dungeons maps that Rob did from the co-DM years. I think that would provide a lot of what you are looking for. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 16, 2018 11:57:16 GMT -5
I think looking at the old Strategic Review and Alarums & Excursions that might have any Greyhawk articles ( bravewolf you write for them do you know of any such articles?). Then there is the Gary Gygax Greyhawk forum at DF that could give hints as well. I am all for trying to piece together a ur-Greyhawk from those sources. Check out A&E #2; it has a letter from EGG that details the development of OD&D. I don't have this issue, so I can't vouch for its usefulness. Issues 8, 15, 20, 100, & 300 also have EGG contributions but I don't have those issues or a good summary of what those letters contained. Thanks, Once I can afford to I'll see about ordering the PDFs of those issues unless someone else is willing & able to instead. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 16, 2018 12:12:18 GMT -5
The El Raja Key Archive by Rob Kuntz has Greyhawk stuff on it including dungeons maps that Rob did from the co-DM years. I think that would provide a lot of what you are looking for. Now if only anyone here has a copy that they could go through & let us know ( with proper legalities) what info would be useful on the proto-Greyhawk Great Kingdom campaigns that'd be great. Once I have the $$ I'll likely order my own copy but the price is steep but likely very well worth it. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 16, 2018 13:01:25 GMT -5
The El Raja Key Archive by Rob Kuntz has Greyhawk stuff on it including dungeons maps that Rob did from the co-DM years. I think that would provide a lot of what you are looking for. Now if only anyone here has a copy that they could go through & let us know ( with proper legalities) what info would be useful on the proto-Greyhawk Great Kingdom campaigns that'd be great. Once I have the $$ I'll likely order my own copy but the price is steep but likely very well worth it. I think you just inadvertently hit on the starting point! From most of the accounts I read, The Great Kingdom was the center point with Blackmoor being a bit off the map. I am thinking that we can begin with searching that particular topic and move on from there. I'm at work now (toilet browsing LOL) but I will do some digging tonight if I can. One other thought is the descriptions of Greyhawk in Quag Keep we're different than what was published. Does anyone remember about when that came into play? Also were these from Gary's work or Norton's additions? |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 16, 2018 13:19:47 GMT -5
I found Megarry's copy of the map but can't upload in my phone. It has Blackmoor on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 16, 2018 15:15:49 GMT -5
I found Megarry's copy of the map but can't upload in my phone. It has Blackmoor on it. I posted a few of the maps in one of the threads. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 16, 2018 15:28:30 GMT -5
There is nada Greyhawk-wise in the Strategic Review and most of the Greyhawk info in Dragon seems to be between issues #52 to #92. Someone would have to comb through issues #1-51 to see if there are any nuggets of info on the Great Kingdom setting up until then. All of the published Greyhawk material seems to be published for 1e AD&D.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 16, 2018 18:07:50 GMT -5
I found Megarry's copy of the map but can't upload in my phone. It has Blackmoor on it. I posted a few of the maps in one of the threads. Gotcha. I am throwing it up here for reference...  A few comments from what I have noticed... 1) We know the GK was used as a wargame and I am assuming the numbers are various domains for that. This would suggest the GK was not very united and/or fracturing. 2) We see familiar and not so familiar locations. What looks to be Furyondy is in a different location and is by the Nyr Dyv instead of its own lake. No Iuz, Celate may be Celine, and there are kingdoms I have never heard of. 3) I would guess Blackmoor to be somewhere near Ten or Celate but it is not clearly marked. 4) Scale? Who knows. I have heard Blackmoor was a few hundred miles north of Greyhawk and I have heard it was closer. Without Greyhawk, Dyvers and other familiar locations I have no idea what the scale would be. 5) IIRC some of these names appeared in Quag Keep so this may be the map Andre Norton saw before writing. 6) I am having a hard time seeing a North America resemblance. As the Nyr Dyv does not resemble Lake Superior in this version I would guess that the intent was still there. It is possible it resembles N.A. in possible locations wich means if there is a connection we are looking at just south of Superior to Hudson Bay but with and altered geography. This would put Blackmoor in Canada and Keoland in Wisconsin. Your guess is as good as mine. Which now means some digging when I have time. I remember Gygax detailing some of the regions like Greyhawk being at Chicago, Dyvers being at Milwaukee and the GK near New York state. However this doesn't fit the above map. Compared to what has been said before the N.A. map is obviously a different iteration. Whether earlier or later I am not sure. I will admit this is both fun and daunting. For my own work I may sit down and try to redraw this to clean it up some and get my own feel for it. I will also compare it to the folio and boxed set to see if that brings up ideas for if the kingdoms were renamed or if they were removed before publication. So far that is where I am. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 16, 2018 18:10:42 GMT -5
The El Raja Key Archive by Rob Kuntz has Greyhawk stuff on it including dungeons maps that Rob did from the co-DM years. I think that would provide a lot of what you are looking for. Now if only anyone here has a copy that they could go through & let us know ( with proper legalities) what info would be useful on the proto-Greyhawk Great Kingdom campaigns that'd be great. Once I have the $$ I'll likely order my own copy but the price is steep but likely very well worth it. Yeah, price wise that is totally off my radar. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 16, 2018 23:30:58 GMT -5
Now if only anyone here has a copy that they could go through & let us know ( with proper legalities) what info would be useful on the proto-Greyhawk Great Kingdom campaigns that'd be great. Once I have the $$ I'll likely order my own copy but the price is steep but likely very well worth it. Yeah, price wise that is totally off my radar. Same here, I thought one or of the members of the board had purchased it; if so maybe if they still post here they'll chime in. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 17, 2018 0:29:30 GMT -5
There is nada Greyhawk-wise in the Strategic Review and most of the Greyhawk info in Dragon seems to be between issues #52 to #92. Someone would have to comb through issues #1-51 to see if there are any nuggets of info on the Great Kingdom setting up until then. All of the published Greyhawk material seems to be published for 1e AD&D. 1-6 have zip on both accounts. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 17, 2018 0:41:38 GMT -5
There is nada Greyhawk-wise in the Strategic Review and most of the Greyhawk info in Dragon seems to be between issues #52 to #92. Someone would have to comb through issues #1-51 to see if there are any nuggets of info on the Great Kingdom setting up until then. All of the published Greyhawk material seems to be published for 1e AD&D. 7, p. 7: EGG gives a capsule summary of D&D's invention. The Great Kingdom is mentioned and Blackmoor's location relative to it. Greyhawk is mentioned as well, though it isn't situated geographically in this article. EGG names the early players. Content occupies less than a page. |
|
|
|
Post by bravewolf on Oct 17, 2018 0:50:07 GMT -5
Issue 8 has zip. Issue 9, pp. 5-6, discusses alignment in D&D in general and GH in particular - albeit very briefly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 17, 2018 1:37:39 GMT -5
Mr Darke said: Check out this blog post by Zenopus Archives that I think covers this point and may also have answers to other points as well. Mr. Darke said: Zenopus seems to believe Furondy is where the Kingdom of Faraz is and combined Faraz with Yerocundy to create Furondy (F a(u)r- u(o)ndy) dropping -az and replacing the 'a' in Far- with 'u' of Faraz and dropped Yeroc- and replace 'o' for the 'u' in -undy before combining them. Iuz seems to be in the east, while the County of Celete, March of Slove & Duchy of Ten (which was changed to the Duchy of Tehn before it was moved east) seem to be Tiger & Wolf Nomads but a lot of the places in the Great Kingdom map were changed when Darlene redrew the map. Mr. Darke said: Blackmoor is very lightly written & right to the east of the Duchy of Ten and south of the EGG of Coot. Mr. Darke said: Blackmoor at the time of this map was just north of the Great Kingdom. Dyvers & the City of Greyhawk are located near the area labeled C. Yerocundy. Mr.Darke said: This seems to be the case for this point. Mr. Darke said: There is NO North America resemblance, Gary just used the US map as a base as the City of Greyhawk is Chicago & Dyvers is Milwaukee and it seems Gary took the basic shape Lake Michigan & Lake Huron combined into Nyr Dyv (Nir Div) if you take the basic shape of both lakes. It seems to be that GH & Dyvers be on south westerns of Lake Michigan, thus Gary must of drawn flipped so both Chicago & Milwaukee south of the lake with Blackmoor & Duchy of Ten be located NY state (Blackmoor) and Ottawa (Duchy of Ten). If this is true the Northern Barbarians where New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island & Nova Scotia. Basically it is highly distorted Midwest, east coast & the south. Mr. Darke said: Keep us updated on your work on this project Mr. Darke.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Oct 17, 2018 1:42:44 GMT -5
There is nada Greyhawk-wise in the Strategic Review and most of the Greyhawk info in Dragon seems to be between issues #52 to #92. Someone would have to comb through issues #1-51 to see if there are any nuggets of info on the Great Kingdom setting up until then. All of the published Greyhawk material seems to be published for 1e AD&D. 1-6 have zip on both accounts. I've seen that as well, the only setting info seems to be Tekumel related. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Oct 17, 2018 9:36:17 GMT -5
Mr Darke said: Check out this blog post by Zenopus Archives that I think covers this point and may also have answers to other points as well. Mr. Darke said: Zenopus seems to believe Furondy is where the Kingdom of Faraz is and combined Faraz with Yerocundy to create Furondy (F a(u)r- u(o)ndy) dropping -az and replacing the 'a' in Far- with 'u' of Faraz and dropped Yeroc- and replace 'o' for the 'u' in -undy before combining them. Iuz seems to be in the east, while the County of Celete, March of Slove & Duchy of Ten (which was changed to the Duchy of Tehn before it was moved east) seem to be Tiger & Wolf Nomads but a lot of the places in the Great Kingdom map were changed when Darlene redrew the map. Mr. Darke said: Blackmoor is very lightly written & right to the east of the Duchy of Ten and south of the EGG of Coot. Mr. Darke said: Blackmoor at the time of this map was just north of the Great Kingdom. Dyvers & the City of Greyhawk are located near the area labeled C. Yerocundy. Mr.Darke said: This seems to be the case for this point. Mr. Darke said: There is NO North America resemblance, Gary just used the US map as a base as the City of Greyhawk is Chicago & Dyvers is Milwaukee and it seems Gary took the basic shape Lake Michigan & Lake Huron combined into Nyr Dyv (Nir Div) if you take the basic shape of both lakes. It seems to be that GH & Dyvers be on south westerns of Lake Michigan, thus Gary must of drawn flipped so both Chicago & Milwaukee south of the lake with Blackmoor & Duchy of Ten be located NY state (Blackmoor) and Ottawa (Duchy of Ten). If this is true the Northern Barbarians where New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island & Nova Scotia. Basically it is highly distorted Midwest, east coast & the south. Mr. Darke said: Keep us updated on your work on this project Mr. Darke. Thanks and I will look at it. Most of what I wrote are assumptions based on just looking at the map. Time will tell how close I am and that is part of the fun. |
|
