| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 20 Sep 2003 : 01:56:38
 This is from Wizards Greyhawk forum.
Yamo
Member
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Everett, WA
Greyhawk's Undermountain?
I admit that I've always loved Undermountain, the big Forgotten Realms megadungeon. There's something just so darn gamable about the idea of a collosal subterranean world completely controlled by a mad, immortal archmage and right under the world's largest known population center to boot. Such a place is isolated, but not too isolated. Furthermore, the combination of sheer size and the poweful malign intelligence controlling (and restocking) it mean that the dungeon will virtually never get "played-out."
Basically, I'm looking for a place to set similar adventures in Greyhawk. One thing that comes immediately to mind are the ruins under Castle Greyhawk. They're right near a big city, well-known, and very large.
I don't know much about the site. However, unless I'm mistaken, they're not currently controlled by anyone, nevermind an insane archmage that enjoys making hapless adventures its playthings. That's a problem.
Can anyone shed more light on exactly what lies in the castle's dungeons and whether it would be a suitable place for the sort of adventuring I had in mind?
Thanks.
__________________
Click here for an exclusive sneak preview of WotC's new Magic ad campaign and celebrity pitchman!
Enter the Yamo's Lair...
Last edited by Yamo on 09-04-03 at 11:39 PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
09-04-03 11:35 PM
PSmedger
Member
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Royal University, Rel Mord 998CY
On the contrary, the dungeons of Castle Greyhawk are under "control" of THE ORIGINAL Mad Archmage. He's all the hook you need to recreate your mega-dungeon....and he has the powers of a demigod to boot.
Also, don't underestimate the links of the lower levels of Castle Greyhawk to the Underdark (Underoerth? DarkOerth?) as a potential for replenishment and expansion of your dungeons, not to mention links to other planes of existence.
-PS
|
| 29 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 27 Sep 2003 : 16:34:35
Thank you,Faraer.I have often read many of your post and enjoyed each
bit as I read,A scholar of D&D for certain.I am always positive that
when I pose such a question that several people here who have a vast
knowledge of the D&D worlds will come through and explain the details
of my question in terms that others as well as myself can understand.
Faraer has done just that!
|
| Faraer |
Posted - 27 Sep 2003 : 14:56:25
The original D&D rules (pre-AD&D, published 1974) were developed in Gary Gygax's campaign based on the delving of the Greyhawk Castle dungeons. In the books, the norm was that D&D campaigns would be based on similar huge multileveled dungeons.
This is one of the tropes that D&D created, rather than one of the many it took from other sources, and Ed Greenwood created a conceptually similar place for his Company of Crazed Venturers campaign which took place in the mid to late 70s. Drow and many other monsters were also brought into the Realms from D&D/Greyhawk (which were indistinguishable at that time) when Ed D&Dized the Realms; that's not in dispute. Obviously, though, it doesn't constitute theft, since it's what you were supposed to do in your campaign.
That's the link between the two dungeons, not an in-universe one.
In regard to Undermountain, I'll point out for those who don't know that it has several deeper, fully developed levels that haven't been published. We're also waiting to see Waterdeep's other major dungeon, the Dungeon of the Crypt, which has also been designed.
TSR published two ersatz Greyhawk Castles, an anti-Gygax spoof (WG7) and a more serious but flaccid attempt at recreation (WGR1). The real thing is finally being worked on for publication by Troll Lord Games. |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 27 Sep 2003 : 01:28:07
quote:
Originally posted by Cardinal Deimos
TOO FUNNY!!!! MWA HA HA HA HA!
Although, some of us with the more dramatic bent have 'NO' idea what that is talking about!
 Speak of the devil! Hi Cardinal,Just talking about you. |
| The Cardinal |
Posted - 26 Sep 2003 : 07:14:38
TOO FUNNY!!!! MWA HA HA HA HA!
Although, some of us with the more dramatic bent have 'NO' idea what that is talking about! |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 26 Sep 2003 : 06:00:30
Thanks Arivia,I knew you wouldn't let me down.
I forgot about the Ghey comments,but it shows the level of people who hated FR.
I did get a kick out of this post.>>
Well, people on the Greyhawk boards seem to be able to spell words correctly and form coherent sentences. That and they rarely, if ever, type in "bwahaahaahaa" as part of their post.
Just my observation.
Halber
Who does that remind me of????
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 26 Sep 2003 : 05:24:08
Here's another, which discusses this more in depth:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52052&highlight=Greyhawk
From this topic, these are the various complaints about the Realms. I'll discuss and probably rant about each in turn.
- Too detailed. I can't find space to run a campaign.
- Too many epic NPCs. My players' PCs are stifled.
- Too many influences from the real world.
- Too much magic.
Too detailed: I'm sorry, but isn't the point of a campaign setting to provide a detailed backdrop for you to run your campaign over? If you're looking for a place to run your campaign without much interference from Wizards, stay out of the Dalelands, the Silver Marches, and the Western Heartlands! Go looking in Vaasa, the Shaar, or Chult! There's way too much Realms for Wizards to do it all in detail. I have a question for you: Which do you prefer: Races of Faerun, or Dwarves Deep? Krunch! or fluff? No matter what, a Realms campaign is going to deviate from canon at some point. It's your choice how much you want to deviate.
Too many epic NPCs: Simple. Don't use them. I use some of them, but I certainly don't have a "revolving door" policy, and I treat it like the special event it should be! If you start throwing around Chosen like goblins, your characters are going to be suppressed, and the campaign will lose interest. Use them sparingly, and use them well. Using the above general usage guidelines, my namesake is a powerful archmage. I can add her to most any Realms campaign, by simply adding lines of text to a few NPCs' descriptions, and placing a tower in the Silver Marches. She doesn't screw up any canon material that I know, but she has great influence. If you're smart, you can do most everything, yet still keep the Realms recognizable and interesting.
Too many influences from the real world: As has been discussed in other places on this site, mistakes have been made with this, most relating to the Horde storyline. I don't care for the Horde, and I don't think many do. I enjoy Maztica and Kara-Tur, but I don't like some of what has been done to those settings(noticeably Amnian/Maztican interaction). At least the Realms have flavor, not vanilla countries heaped on top of each other.
Too much magic: The level of magic in the Realms is fine. The nobles treat it like a toy, the archmages give condescending lessons on how to use it...and the magelings use it recklessly. Everything makes sense for a continent greatly influenced by magic.
Eventually, it comes down to personal choice. Interesting how the first conversation William linked to(the one on the Greyhawk boards) degenerated into "this is ghey, that's ghey, you're ghey", and the FR one was a bit more intelligent... |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 25 Sep 2003 : 22:58:08
quote:
Originally posted by Arivia
I'd like to see the link. See, there's a difference between D&D and Greyhawk material. The examples did originally appear in Greyhawk, but at the time, the name was synoymous with D&D. It's become part of the basic milieu.
But of course!!!
The one claiming bad stuff.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104511
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104906
link to "Other Worlds forums"
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=260
Any of these have coflicting views or FR hate mail. |
| Arivia |
Posted - 25 Sep 2003 : 19:31:21
I'd like to see the link. See, there's a difference between D&D and Greyhawk material. The examples did originally appear in Greyhawk, but at the time, the name was synoymous with D&D. It's become part of the basic milieu. |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 25 Sep 2003 : 16:08:18
Originally posted by Arivia
Well, the D&D rules aren't really set up around Greyhawk. The 1e core rulebooks contain plenty of references to Greyhawk, with Gary writing them and all. The 3e core rulebooks use Greyhawk as the basic setting. Most every mention of a place or organization here is from Greyhawk, which makes running the Realms annoying when a player asks where Rel Mord is. Oh, well...
______________________________________________________________________
William:
Most of the people in the Greyhawk forum look at this differently.
I am not going to cut and paste all the comments but...Seems they
think the drow and many other ideas have been stolen from GH.
Any thoughts on this!!!! I can give a link if you want it.I think
Yamo knows what I am talking about.
______________________________________________________________________
Originally posted by Arivia
No canon link, but if you deviate slightly, I don't think anyone's going to complain. It'd be a very simple task.
______________________________________________________________________
William:
Thanks Arivia,Though I have decided myself to stay with 2e groups until this is straightend out and yes,there are still some out there.
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 25 Sep 2003 : 02:34:37
No canon link, but if you deviate slightly, I don't think anyone's going to complain. It'd be a very simple task. |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 25 Sep 2003 : 01:21:23
quote:
Originally posted by Yamo
Wow. It's my post!
Anyway, Castle Greyhawk was apparently, in many ways, not just the original archetypal D&D-style dungeon, but the direct forebearer of Undermountain (huge sprawling underground maze beneath the continent's biggest city ruled by a mad wizard).
In Gary Gygax's original campaign, the lower levels of the Castle's dungeons were riddled with countless connections to other planes and worlds, so a direct connection to Faerun via Undermountain is certainly within the realm of possibility!
______________________________________________________________________
Yup,Its yer post.Glad you don't mind.I jump around In all the wizard forums especially other worlds.Found your post very interesting.3e has closed some of these portals to other realms and
worlds.Sage,Arivia,Yasraena & Bookwrym are the experts here,I as already mentioned just found it and hoped there might still be a link
even with 3e rules. |
| Yamo |
Posted - 24 Sep 2003 : 06:09:28
Wow. It's my post!
Anyway, Castle Greyhawk was apparently, in many ways, not just the original archetypal D&D-style dungeon, but the direct forebearer of Undermountain (huge sprawling underground maze beneath the continent's biggest city ruled by a mad wizard).
In Gary Gygax's original campaign, the lower levels of the Castle's dungeons were riddled with countless connections to other planes and worlds, so a direct connection to Faerun via Undermountain is certainly within the realm of possibility! |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 18:13:24
Thanks Sage!!!!
I know you are busy as is but I deeply appreciate the effort you are
putting forth in digging the truth up. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 15:44:41
Well, after searching through most of the official Greyhawk material that I own (which is pretty much all of the 2e material published except maybe one or two adventure modules), I can find no mention made of Undermountain, or any supposed connection to Castle Greyhawk.
Although, looking through one of the old copies of the Oerth Journal I did find an interesting tidbit about a herald of Halaster who regularly 'shuttles' messages from his master to an as yet unknown and unidentified party somehwere in the city of Greyhawk. The brief mention is vague (for obvious reasons), and was placed in the journal most likely as a campaign or adventure hook. But the interesting thing about the passage is that it would seem to indicate that a connection does indeed exist, whether by wizard's portal magic or something more permanent.
Oh, and before I forget...this is purely fan-created material from 1996.
I will continue a more refined search through some of the more archived material from the old Canonfire forum threads that I have saved over the years...
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 06:16:49
Not a problem. |
| Arivia |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 06:15:38
I knew it was somewhere on here! Thanks, Bookwyrm. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 06:12:20
Right here.
Don't worry, it's not copywrited or anything.  |
| Arivia |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 05:21:15
Where have you heard that before? |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 05:12:31
quote:
Originally posted by Arivia
Crunch is good(not krunch!)
Hmm . . . where have I heard that before . . . . |
| Arivia |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 03:50:46
Good joke. I think everyone wants the old cosmology back, as the new cosmologies really serve no purpose in most campaign settings. Hopefully this 3e Planescape thing will finish off the 3e cosmology models, and let us all plan trips to Sigil with ease, not having to juggle deity conversions and alternate cosmology strings and a whole lot of other useless junk. Until it's straightened out, well...the 3e Manual of the Planes is Planescape...lite. I think most people looked at the 3e Manual of the Planes and alternate cosmolgy stuff and simply said no. And I think Wizards knew they would, which is why over three-quarters of the book is still usuable. After all, if there are no paraelemental planes, why include the paraelementals?
PS: What's P&P? |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 03:43:06
Thanks for the kind words Arivia,I quess I wish the Cosmology issue
between 2e & 3e could be settled.I do appreciate everyones patience.
I haven't played P & P as much as some and never been the DM,so I
was there for the ride.I played more pc game D & D.
 I started taking Cosmology once but I didn't like stying peoples hair. |
| Arivia |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 03:31:15
What do you have to apologize for? It is a different question, and would look odd in the other scroll...
Generally, if you want any fluff these days, you have to go back to 2e material. That's why I kept my 2e campaign supplements and a few other things around...as 3e has proven to be very krunchy...but has virtually no fluff. Crunch is good(not krunch!), but half the point of a campaign setting is to have lots of consistent fluff. Even Wizards seems to be drawing itself into boxes when it comes to FR fluff... |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 03:22:35
Wow,didn't know it but I opened another can of worms.Yasraena I am glad your willing to look into this along with Sage Of Perth.Thanks for showing up.
Sorry Ariva,
Guess this is similar to what I was asking about the planes.
I am thinking of going straight to the source as far as Planescape is concerned.No wonder some groups still play 2e.
If I were from Greyhawk I would probably call the dim forest home...
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 02:20:45
See, the 3e rulebooks do use Greyhawk as the basic setting. The core rulebooks themselves aren't really the problem, it's the various D&D supplements, especially the class-related ones. These supplements include various organizations and other matter for Greyhawk that can be a nightmare to convert to the Realms. I've had a few experiences where I've had to break the news to someone that they can't be their favorite prestige class, simply because it doesn't exist...I believe the original campaign setting was Blackmoor, the one Dave Arneson created for his D&D campaign. I know that Greyhawk was the first campaign setting TSR published, but that the two editions of AD&D, according to what I've read(which is the actual rulebooks) didn't favor a particular setting, instead taking place in D&D General Realm(my name for a generic, unspecified campaign setting lite sort of thing), different from Greyhawk or the Realms. The "Grand Unified Cosmology" introduced in the original Manual of the Planes, and expanded upon in Planescape and other rulebooks, was acknowledged by the 2e core rulebooks, but they still didn't pick a particular one to use to reference... |
| Yasraena |
Posted - 21 Sep 2003 : 01:53:00
I always thought that the original D&D rules were set up around Greyhawk, because wasn't Greyhawk supposed to be the 'name world' that the game was taking place in? It was the first 'name world' that TSR put out anyway.
William - My knowledge of Oerth isn't all encompassing, although I do know my fair share about it. As far as the portal between Undermountain and Castle Greyhawk, it's news to me. I don't remember reading anything about that in any of the original books I own, but I could be wrong.
I'm with Sage in that I should probably dig out those old Greyhawk tomes (box set and hard back Adventures book) and peruse them for some info on this. |
| Arivia |
Posted - 20 Sep 2003 : 22:20:04
Well, the D&D rules aren't really set up around Greyhawk. The 1e core rulebooks contain plenty of references to Greyhawk, with Gary writing them and all. The 3e core rulebooks use Greyhawk as the basic setting. Most every mention of a place or organization here is from Greyhawk, which makes running the Realms annoying when a player asks where Rel Mord is. Oh, well... |
| William of Waterdeep |
Posted - 20 Sep 2003 : 21:25:06
Thanks bookwrym and Sage.
If you could come up with something, I am Interested,or very curious.
Wasn't the D&D rules basicially set up around Greyhawk?
I thought my good friend a certain female Drow who came from Greyhawk
would respond.Since she probably has great knowledge of the area. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 20 Sep 2003 : 05:59:53
Hmm...I think I remember reading something about this - at least in this regard - in one of the older Greyhawk boxed sets, although I cannot remember which one it is. I will have a look through some of my more older Greyhawk tomes sometime today, and try and find some information...
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 20 Sep 2003 : 04:05:34
There's a portal between the two? I never heard of that -- though that's not all that surprising.
I'm sure it's no longer there, if it ever was, unless you want to ignore the changes to the 3e Realmsian cosmology. |
|
|
