And there is Greyhawk. Now, it is/was the default setting (at least in spirit) of D&D, and so it's de base - many monsters from GH ended up all around the D&D multiverse. But I wonder.... Is/was there any monsters still exclusive to Greyhawk?
- vampire cactus
- camprat
- changecat
- crystalmist
- grung
- ingundi
- nimbus
- sea sprite
- mist wolf (my favorite, sure to freak out many players)
- nauskiree
- xvart
- norker
- animus
- grigaur
- losel
- amedian gutworm
- quallan
- nyrrian boatcrusher
- suel lich
- dakon
- phalanx vermin
- blood golem of Hextor
- marodin
and the list goes on.. (at least till the next FR accessory which will steal a few more
)http://home.flash.net/~brenfrow/gh/gh-mc5.htm
The Greyhawk Dragon should always stay campaign specific.
I think they changed it to a generic dragon at somepoint in 2e. IIRC there was a FR Dragon magazine series called Wyrms of the North and one of those dragons was basically a Greyhawk Dragon.
Mike
What's wrong with naming monsters for a city or a region? We already do it in the real world.
From a biological point of view, it makes sense too. After all, differences between ethnic groups of the same species are often influenced by the biotope they live in. Granted, associating dragons with a single city is kind of silly but I can think of better examples ("Red Kings of the Hellfurnace", for instance). Not to mention that "Greyhawk" is not just the name of a city anymore but of the whole region ruled by that city.
You've got to admit that it sounds better to have defeated a pack of "Pomarj Gnawers" than a pack of "worgs". Well, at least IMHO.
What's wrong with naming monsters for a city or a region?
Nothing, if the creature is associated with that city or region in some significant way. There are less than a handful of Greyhawk dragons in Greyhawk City, though, and many more "Greyhawk" dragons outside of Greyhawk than in it.
There's also the point that if other types of dragons were named after locales it would fit much better. Instead, they're named for colors or substances.
Granted, associating dragons with a single city is kind of silly but I can think of better examples
I'm sure you can. I wasn't decrying naming monsters after places in general. I only think that "steel dragon" is a much better name than "Greyhawk dragon."
You've got to admit that it sounds better to have defeated a pack of "Pomarj Gnawers" than a pack of "worgs".
We'll have to disagree there, too.
There are less than a handful of Greyhawk dragons in Greyhawk City, though, and many more "Greyhawk" dragons outside of Greyhawk than in it.
I always got the impression that "Greyhawk dragon" was a term used in and around the central Flanaess because a) dragons probably have names in draconic for each race that humans don't use and b) other races name dragons after their skin colors, which you almost never see on a Greyhawk dragon because they maintain human form most of the time.
Thus, the name, Greyhawk dragon, though not perfect, stuck because they are known to dabbe there. Yes, people in Dyvers would probably use this name, as it's the only name for this kind of dragon that they've heard. They might get upset that Greyhawk gets a dragon named after them and start calling gold dragons "Dyvers dragons", but that's not going to take off because gold dragons already have a name.
It would be a bit like naming dopplegangers after their skin color... would the average person know what that is?
Remember - most of the population of the Flanaess don't even distinguished between wyrms by type - a dragon is a dragon is a dragon. They're big, fundamentally scary and live (mostly) in tales or far away (and when they don't - that's serious grounds for upping sticks and getting the hell out of there). There might be tales that some wyrms are good and some aren't, but your peasent in the field (quite wisely) isn't going to stick around to find out.
Remember - most of the population of the Flanaess don't even distinguished between wyrms by type - a dragon is a dragon is a dragon.
Yeah, but we distinguish between them, and we, in the more or less real world, are the ones stuck with the names. The issue isn't so much "Can I rationalize why people in the fantasy world might give a creature a glaringly inappropriate and inconsistent name?" but "Why should a creature in the game have such a glaringly inappropriate and inconsistent name, when there's a much better one available?"
a glaringly inappropriate and inconsistent name
In your opinion, maybe, but don't generalize it to all of us please.
It isn't really Good, so it isn't a (precious) metallaic dragon.
It is Neutral, so it is Steel (a metal) grey (a neutral color).
That seems pretty appropriate to me.
As long as we don't face puce or vanadium dragons, I am happy.
In your opinion, maybe, but don't generalize it to all of us please.
As no one's disagreed yet that every other type of dragon is named for a color or substance, or that a plurality of "Greyhawk dragons" live somewhere other than Greyhawk, I don't apologize for my choice of words. I chose them very carefully (though in retrospect, the "glaringly" part was unnecessary, and I should have left it out).
I understand that many people are satisfied or like the name in question, and I don't think these people are lacking in intelligence or taste. Your justifications are actually very good; my point was that the other available name is more appropriate and consistent.
Yes, this is my opinion, but that can be assumed, rather than needing to be specifically pointed out.
Of course, in the future they'll have aluminium (aluminum for you colonists) dragons. :D
I'm shocked we don't have that now. Isn't that what you get when a blue dragon breathes on a boxite dragon?