The Adventure Path on Greyhawk - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

The Adventure Path on Greyhawk

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Alzrius
Sep 08, 2004 22:09:22 Erik Mona, editor of Dungeon magazine, just mentioned that the second Adventure Path for Dungeon would be located on the same world as the first (and even have an NPC from the first, Celeste), but about 1,650 miles to the northeast.

The reason I mention this hear is that the last adventure, "Strike on Shatterhorn" in issue #115, seemed to place the entire Adventure Path firmly on Oerth. You may have noticed that it said Shatterhorn was located in the Amedio Jungle.

What's more, the map of the region in that issue matches up perfectly with the editorial suggestion for placing the Adventure Path on Oerth made at the end of the letters colum in issue #109: that Cauldron is in the Hellfurnaces, at hex 77-U1 of the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer map.
#2
Brom_Blackforge
Sep 09, 2004 13:08:33 I think that all Dungeon adventures are set in Greyhawk, unless they specifically say otherwise. Sure, they say "generic setting," but they will use Greyhawk placenames. The northern adventure in the most recent issue is another example of this. It's really such a small morsel, but I'm happy to receive it.
#3
Alzrius
Sep 09, 2004 23:18:35
I think that all Dungeon adventures are set in Greyhawk, unless they specifically say otherwise. Sure, they say "generic setting," but they will use Greyhawk placenames. The northern adventure in the most recent issue is another example of this. It's really such a small morsel, but I'm happy to receive it.

From what I understand, all generic adventures use the Greyhawk gods, but thats about it. Most of the adventures don't use GH placenames that I've seen unless they're meant to be set there. Hence why I found this use of a placename on the Flanaess to be noteworthy.
#4
Brom_Blackforge
Sep 10, 2004 9:11:55 All I'm saying is that, it seems like lately the "generic" adventures have been using Greyhawk locations. IIRC, the adventure "Raiders of Black Ice" by Wolfgang Baur in the most recent Dungeon is set in the extreme north of the Flanaess. And then there's Cauldron in the south, as was mentioned.

IMHO, it's only proper for the "generic" adventures to be set in Greyhawk, since this is the default setting.
#5
zombiegleemax
Sep 11, 2004 5:38:04 If these upcoming 20 adventures are done well, we may see a whole lot of the Flanaess "developed."
#6
Alzrius
Sep 12, 2004 0:17:13
All I'm saying is that, it seems like lately the "generic" adventures have been using Greyhawk locations. IIRC, the adventure "Raiders of Black Ice" by Wolfgang Baur in the most recent Dungeon is set in the extreme north of the Flanaess. And then there's Cauldron in the south, as was mentioned.

IMHO, it's only proper for the "generic" adventures to be set in Greyhawk, since this is the default setting.

The thing is, if its in a specific setting, then its not a "generic" adventure, since "generic" here is understood to be "setting-neutral".

Most generic adventures are set in towns that have never before been mentioned, and never will be again. "Raiders of Black Ice" wasn't a generic adventure, it was a Greyhawk adventure. "Buzz on the Bridge" from issue #110, was a generic adventure.

The idea of Greyhawk being the default setting isn't something I place a lot of stock in. When they say its the default setting, what's really meant is that a small number of GH deities are being used as generic deities, mostly for purposes of giving NPC clerics the proper domains and favored weapons and such. Nothing else specific to the setting is being used (save for the named spells, but those were always considered to be on almost every other world).
#7
cwslyclgh
Sep 12, 2004 12:27:09
What's more, the map of the region in that issue matches up perfectly with the editorial suggestion for placing the Adventure Path on Oerth made at the end of the letters colum in issue #109: that Cauldron is in the Hellfurnaces, at hex 77-U1 of the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer map.

then I suppose we should look at what is 1650 miles north east of there... to see where the next Adventure path lies... so that puts us near the southern phostwood... giving an arch because we do not the exact degree north-east, I would say somplace shield lands, bandit kingdoms, norther county of Urnst, or possibly the pale.
#8
erik_mona
Sep 12, 2004 12:37:18 My count puts it about 350 miles southeast of the Bandit Kingdoms.

--Erik
#9
cwslyclgh
Sep 12, 2004 12:47:26
My count puts it about 350 miles southeast of the Bandit Kingdoms.

--Erik

puts us closer to the northern county of Urnst then. or perhaps even north-western Nyrond
#10
scoti_garbidis
Sep 12, 2004 16:56:00 All I know is that I am one step closer to being even more excited about Dungeon. BTW, where on the timeline are we with those big fold out maps of WOG.
#11
Brom_Blackforge
Sep 13, 2004 11:18:40
The thing is, if its in a specific setting, then its not a "generic" adventure, since "generic" here is understood to be "setting-neutral".

Most generic adventures are set in towns that have never before been mentioned, and never will be again. "Raiders of Black Ice" wasn't a generic adventure, it was a Greyhawk adventure. "Buzz on the Bridge" from issue #110, was a generic adventure.

But, if you look at "Raiders of Black Ice," it says "generic" (or at least that's what I remember - I don't have it in front of me right now). So does the current Adventure Path (again, unless I'm completely mistaken). I can't recall seeing any recent adventures labeled as Greyhawk-specific, even though they used Greyhawk placenames.

Now, of course, you're right - if an adventure uses setting-specific locations, then it's not generic. (Compare "The Sunless Citadel," and that whole line of WotC modules - they really were generic, and weren't unique to any particular setting.) However, if Dungeon needs to label their Greyhawk adventures as "generic" in order to use Greyhawk locations, that's fine with me.
#12
erik_mona
Sep 15, 2004 14:11:01 Good, then. ;)

--Erik

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Alzrius Sep 08, 2004 22:09:22	Erik Mona, editor of Dungeon magazine, just mentioned that the second Adventure Path for Dungeon would be located on the same world as the first (and even have an NPC from the first, Celeste), but about 1,650 miles to the northeast. The reason I mention this hear is that the last adventure, "Strike on Shatterhorn" in issue #115, seemed to place the entire Adventure Path firmly on Oerth. You may have noticed that it said Shatterhorn was located in the Amedio Jungle. What's more, the map of the region in that issue matches up perfectly with the editorial suggestion for placing the Adventure Path on Oerth made at the end of the letters colum in issue #109: that Cauldron is in the Hellfurnaces, at hex 77-U1 of the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer map.
#2 Brom_Blackforge Sep 09, 2004 13:08:33	I think that all Dungeon adventures are set in Greyhawk, unless they specifically say otherwise. Sure, they say "generic setting," but they will use Greyhawk placenames. The northern adventure in the most recent issue is another example of this. It's really such a small morsel, but I'm happy to receive it.
#3 Alzrius Sep 09, 2004 23:18:35	I think that all Dungeon adventures are set in Greyhawk, unless they specifically say otherwise. Sure, they say "generic setting," but they will use Greyhawk placenames. The northern adventure in the most recent issue is another example of this. It's really such a small morsel, but I'm happy to receive it. From what I understand, all generic adventures use the Greyhawk gods, but thats about it. Most of the adventures don't use GH placenames that I've seen unless they're meant to be set there. Hence why I found this use of a placename on the Flanaess to be noteworthy.
#4 Brom_Blackforge Sep 10, 2004 9:11:55	All I'm saying is that, it seems like lately the "generic" adventures have been using Greyhawk locations. IIRC, the adventure "Raiders of Black Ice" by Wolfgang Baur in the most recent Dungeon is set in the extreme north of the Flanaess. And then there's Cauldron in the south, as was mentioned. IMHO, it's only proper for the "generic" adventures to be set in Greyhawk, since this is the default setting.
#5 zombiegleemax Sep 11, 2004 5:38:04	If these upcoming 20 adventures are done well, we may see a whole lot of the Flanaess "developed."
#6 Alzrius Sep 12, 2004 0:17:13	All I'm saying is that, it seems like lately the "generic" adventures have been using Greyhawk locations. IIRC, the adventure "Raiders of Black Ice" by Wolfgang Baur in the most recent Dungeon is set in the extreme north of the Flanaess. And then there's Cauldron in the south, as was mentioned. IMHO, it's only proper for the "generic" adventures to be set in Greyhawk, since this is the default setting. The thing is, if its in a specific setting, then its not a "generic" adventure, since "generic" here is understood to be "setting-neutral". Most generic adventures are set in towns that have never before been mentioned, and never will be again. "Raiders of Black Ice" wasn't a generic adventure, it was a Greyhawk adventure. "Buzz on the Bridge" from issue #110, was a generic adventure. The idea of Greyhawk being the default setting isn't something I place a lot of stock in. When they say its the default setting, what's really meant is that a small number of GH deities are being used as generic deities, mostly for purposes of giving NPC clerics the proper domains and favored weapons and such. Nothing else specific to the setting is being used (save for the named spells, but those were always considered to be on almost every other world).
#7 cwslyclgh Sep 12, 2004 12:27:09	What's more, the map of the region in that issue matches up perfectly with the editorial suggestion for placing the Adventure Path on Oerth made at the end of the letters colum in issue #109: that Cauldron is in the Hellfurnaces, at hex 77-U1 of the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer map. then I suppose we should look at what is 1650 miles north east of there... to see where the next Adventure path lies... so that puts us near the southern phostwood... giving an arch because we do not the exact degree north-east, I would say somplace shield lands, bandit kingdoms, norther county of Urnst, or possibly the pale.
#8 erik_mona Sep 12, 2004 12:37:18	My count puts it about 350 miles southeast of the Bandit Kingdoms. --Erik
#9 cwslyclgh Sep 12, 2004 12:47:26	My count puts it about 350 miles southeast of the Bandit Kingdoms. --Erik puts us closer to the northern county of Urnst then. or perhaps even north-western Nyrond
#10 scoti_garbidis Sep 12, 2004 16:56:00	All I know is that I am one step closer to being even more excited about Dungeon. BTW, where on the timeline are we with those big fold out maps of WOG.
#11 Brom_Blackforge Sep 13, 2004 11:18:40	The thing is, if its in a specific setting, then its not a "generic" adventure, since "generic" here is understood to be "setting-neutral". Most generic adventures are set in towns that have never before been mentioned, and never will be again. "Raiders of Black Ice" wasn't a generic adventure, it was a Greyhawk adventure. "Buzz on the Bridge" from issue #110, was a generic adventure. But, if you look at "Raiders of Black Ice," it says "generic" (or at least that's what I remember - I don't have it in front of me right now). So does the current Adventure Path (again, unless I'm completely mistaken). I can't recall seeing any recent adventures labeled as Greyhawk-specific, even though they used Greyhawk placenames. Now, of course, you're right - if an adventure uses setting-specific locations, then it's not generic. (Compare "The Sunless Citadel," and that whole line of WotC modules - they really were generic, and weren't unique to any particular setting.) However, if Dungeon needs to label their Greyhawk adventures as "generic" in order to use Greyhawk locations, that's fine with me.
#12 erik_mona Sep 15, 2004 14:11:01	Good, then. ;) --Erik