Greyhawk in the New Edition

Greyhawk is the D&D setting. Many of the classic monsters have come from Greyhawk. All the classic races are in Greyhawk. Greyhawk pretty much is D&D, because that's where D&D started. All of the other D&D settings are variants of the same general concept, some minor, other major.

Why then, should WotC create a new "generic" setting when Greyhawk is the "generic" D&D setting? Why use the Nentir Vale, when you have the Domain of Greyhawk? I seriously propose using Greyhawk as the generic setting of the new D&D.
My prediction is that Greyhawk will see increased prominence in the new setting since in 3rd it was the flagship setting but I think Nentir Vale/points of light will probobly be the default setting.  What remains to be seen is if they rotate out Living Forgotten Realms for Living Greyhawk....
I'm second from the left in the picture.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

The problem is, Greyhawk WAS D&D - and not even always; remember, there was Mystara for Basic BEFPRE it. 

Not  abad setting, but very bvanilla, old fashioned, Gygaxian and all.

D&D would need another Eberron instead, NOW. 
I agree that 4th edition shipped with too shallow a campaign setting (or at least that's what I'm choosing to take out of this!).  Greyhawk survived as the de facto setting for so long because it had history and a developed base.  However, I don't think we necessarily NEED greyhawk in and of itself.  5th edition just needs to ship with a more developed and interesting setting that can be used throughout all the canon.  The whole "points of light" idea didn't provide a solid enough base in my opinion for the DM that didn't necessarily want to build an entire world on their own.  Your mileage may vary ;)
I agree that 4th edition shipped with too shallow a campaign setting (or at least that's what I'm choosing to take out of this!).  Greyhawk survived as the de facto setting for so long because it had history and a developed base.  However, I don't think we necessarily NEED greyhawk in and of itself.  5th edition just needs to ship with a more developed and interesting setting that can be used throughout all the canon.  The whole "points of light" idea didn't provide a solid enough base in my opinion for the DM that didn't necessarily want to build an entire world on their own.  Your mileage may vary ;)

PoL is deliberatly bmade so - there is a sizeable portion of fandom whjo just wanted a simpler setting, bare bones, tyo make stuff around. The most popular setting ever was Homebrew, ya know.

It is actually in a way BETTER than Greyhawk or such - no fluff, no lore to 'choke' beginners, for once.

And also, old do not equate good. There is a sizeable amount of Greyhawk haters for reasons. Some good, logics and elaborated. 
The problem is, Greyhawk WAS D&D - and not even always; remember, there was Mystara for Basic BEFPRE it. 

Not  abad setting, but very bvanilla, old fashioned, Gygaxian and all.

D&D would need another Eberron instead, NOW. 



You're first statement is completely wrong. The version of BD&D you're thinking of came out after AD&D, and Greyhawk predates published D&D. The first product that mentioned Mystara, X1 The Isle of Dread came out in 1980. I would say that Greyhawk's vanillaness is exactly why it is perfect for the default setting for the new version of D&D. "Old fashionedness" is not bad, at least not necessarilly and calling an rpg related material "Gygaxian" as far as I'm concerned is one of the highest forms of praise you could give it.
I think the whole "default setting" isn't all that important.  If you go back and read your 3rd edition PHB or your 4th edition PHB, I think you'll find just a couple passing references to setting.  If this new edition is modular/customizable, I bet that the basic rules will be 20 or 30 pages and won't have any mention of setting or gods or anything like that.  But I've been wrong before!
The problem is, Greyhawk WAS D&D - and not even always; remember, there was Mystara for Basic BEFPRE it. 

Not  abad setting, but very bvanilla, old fashioned, Gygaxian and all.

D&D would need another Eberron instead, NOW. 



You're first statement is completely wrong. The version of BD&D you're thinking of came out after AD&D, and Greyhawk predates published D&D. The first product that mentioned Mystara, X1 The Isle of Dread came out in 1980. I would say that Greyhawk's vanillaness is exactly why it is perfect for the default setting for the new version of D&D. "Old fashionedness" is not bad, at least not necessarilly and calling an rpg related material "Gygaxian" as far as I'm concerned is one of the highest forms of praise you could give it.

Mystara is older, but was codified later, as far I know.

PoL is more vanilla in here, more recent designed and better fitting modern rping and gaming taste, and Gugaxian is a form of design and gaming with SEVERE problems, a turn off for many.

Greyhawk is too late, I fear. C'est la vie.
D&D need a NEW setting. Not reheashed past, as much i like it too on times. 
I agree that 4th edition shipped with too shallow a campaign setting (or at least that's what I'm choosing to take out of this!).  Greyhawk survived as the de facto setting for so long because it had history and a developed base.  However, I don't think we necessarily NEED greyhawk in and of itself.  5th edition just needs to ship with a more developed and interesting setting that can be used throughout all the canon.  The whole "points of light" idea didn't provide a solid enough base in my opinion for the DM that didn't necessarily want to build an entire world on their own.  Your mileage may vary ;)

PoL is deliberatly bmade so - there is a sizeable portion of fandom whjo just wanted a simpler setting, bare bones, tyo make stuff around. The most popular setting ever was Homebrew, ya know.

It is actually in a way BETTER than Greyhawk or such - no fluff, no lore to 'choke' beginners, for once.

And also, old do not equate good. There is a sizeable amount of Greyhawk haters for reasons. Some good, logics and elaborated. 



I don't disagree really.  I'm not even a big fan of Greyhawk, but I do like having something less bland to crib ideas from. One of the things people complain about with 4th edition is the lack of roleplaying (which I think is pretty obviously BS) and some developed "fluff" might help unify the community a bit by hearkening back to what other editions developed well.  Clearly, you don't want to overdo it and inundate new players with more than they can bother take in, but that's what supplements are for.
I agree that 4th edition shipped with too shallow a campaign setting (or at least that's what I'm choosing to take out of this!).  Greyhawk survived as the de facto setting for so long because it had history and a developed base.  However, I don't think we necessarily NEED greyhawk in and of itself.  5th edition just needs to ship with a more developed and interesting setting that can be used throughout all the canon.  The whole "points of light" idea didn't provide a solid enough base in my opinion for the DM that didn't necessarily want to build an entire world on their own.  Your mileage may vary ;)

PoL is deliberatly bmade so - there is a sizeable portion of fandom whjo just wanted a simpler setting, bare bones, tyo make stuff around. The most popular setting ever was Homebrew, ya know.

It is actually in a way BETTER than Greyhawk or such - no fluff, no lore to 'choke' beginners, for once.

And also, old do not equate good. There is a sizeable amount of Greyhawk haters for reasons. Some good, logics and elaborated. 



Thing is, for the core books you wouldn't need to go too far into the "lore". Just use proper names from the Greyhawk setting in place of whatever proper names you would otherwise have to make up. There's no more  hindrance to homebrewing if you do that than if you use a newly made up setting. It'd be basically the same thing.

Good doesn't necessarilly mean bad either. Seriously if you hate Greyhawk then chances are you don't like a lot of the things that make D&D unique. In that case you're likely to be doing a lot of homebrewing anyways.
Mystara is older, but was codified later, as far I know.

PoL is more vanilla in here, more recent designed and better fitting modern rping and gaming taste, and Gugaxian is a form of design and gaming with SEVERE problems, a turn off for many.

Greyhawk is too late, I fear. C'est la vie.
D&D need a NEW setting. Not reheashed past, as much i like it too on times. 



You're probably thinking of Blackmoor, Dave Arneson's setting. That was indeed later incorporated into Mystara later, but as a far distant past. As far as I'm concerned Blackmoor would also make an excellent generic D&D setting, but might turn people off with it's heavy dose of Scifi elements (which were also present in Greyhawk to a degree, but really only appeared in the published form as the module Expedition to the Barrier Peaks). Blackmoor is also a small enough setting that you could fit a pretty good overview of it, like the Nentir Vale, in the DMG. Of course the same thing could be said of Mystara's Grand Duchy of Karameikos.

I think there are plenty of people for whom Greyhawk is perfectly in tune with they're rpg tastes. They're just not buying 4e right now. They could be buying the new version of D&D, though.

There's no reason there can't be a new setting, or multiple new settings. But for a game that truly deserves to be called D&D, I think we need a pre-existing setting as the "core" setting.
The problem is also limited ressources - WOTC and the D&D sections are small fries to the Hasbro conhl;omerate, mon ami - it,s a truth to face.

So, there is limited money and manpower to throw around, specially ona  del;icate time and situation as *now*.
There is no ressources for Greyhawk NOW, they must put all on ONE setting, or none.  The survival of the new edition is at stake in it's first weeks, months. 


If you want GH so much, homebrew it and post it here when both are done (5th ed. and your homebrew). 
I might do that. But definetly want the starting point to pretty close to Greyhawk to start with at least. Much closer than 4e's basic setting was.
Another thing to remember is that one of Wizards goals is to appeal to players of older editions. To do that, they will need to respect the traditions of D&D alot more than they did in developing 4e. Starting with one of the oldest campaign settings as a baseline is a way to do that.
Except that slavish devotion to the past is a rigid mindset stopping progress. 

In times, again, you can not have X AND Y - you can have only X OR Y.And it is thr case here. You can not please both the traditionalists and progressives, you will be turned off by BOTH. It' sone, or the other.

Again, if you want so much GH, gygaxisms and such guys, there is the retroclones.  I want progressive and fresh gaming.


Damn you, broken glasses! 
There is no such thing as "progress" with regards to a game. There is only what people enjoy.
There is no such thing as "progress" with regards to a game. There is only what people enjoy.

Classic 'all is sujective' defence, to dispel critics.

No, things are objective too even in games. You cand ebate and argyments for mechanics with statistic by example. And a game can be more than a game, as Astrid's Parlor very existance point at - fighting inherant sexism and other bad negative 'isms' in gaming is one goal.

Yes, there is progress possible.

And there is  no idols, Boddhidharma told us that if needed, we can clean ouselves with the holy sutras.
Uh-huh.

I agree with having the classic named spells, items and such back in the core books. However, I thing Greyhawk would be better served by having its own campaign setting books--A players' guide as well as a full setting book comparable to the LGG, but also with additional game materials like monsters, spells and such. I think the timeline should be advanced, but intead of "spell plaguing" it, just go with organic, low-effect changes as well as ioncoorporating the events from the Living Greyhawk campaign and the Dungeon adventure paths.

Greyhawk is an excellent setting with plenty of verisimilitude, room for adventure--and a strong following. I invite anyone who's interested in learning about the setting to join the discussion over at Canonfire! where players of all editions (or even different game systems) are welcomed and the topic is always Greyhawk.
I'm gonna throw my voice out in the "bring back Greyhawk" crowd. It's pretty much my favorite setting. 576 CY. of course. I don't hate post wars Greyhawk - but I didn't care for all the changes. For instance, I love using the Horned Society as villians. They're a distinct and different flavor of evil then Iuz - so I wasn't too happy with them being eaten by Iuz later on.
Learn about Liberty: http://www.youtube.com/user/LearnLiberty Free Market Capitalism is the truest, and best hope for man kind. IMAGE(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/Rumek_Testament/NeoGrognardextracroped.jpg) Visit my blog at: www.theneogrognard.blogspot.com
I agree, Greyhawk needs lovin'.  It just feels 'right' as the default setting. 

I would also like to see Greyhawk make a comeback. All the named items and spells in D&D come from Greyhawk so it fits really well with D&D Next.

I am running AD&D tonight and I've read over the PH, DMG, and MM (1E). Gygax's ideas are as good today as they were back then. Mechanics could be brought forward but the thrills and concepts should remain the same. The PH in particular is filled with advice for players on adventuring and roleplaying. An even better book than I remember.
As I posted elsewhere,  I would take a three-tiered approach.

As was done with 3e, the proper names for the World of Greyhawk should flavor spells, deities, and the like. The World of Greyhawk begins as the "assumed" default setting.

Then I would release the World Builder’s Guide. This book would not only encourage DMs to build their own settings, but allow them to do so in a manner that is consistent and structured. The creation of new races, classes, spells, magic systems, and pantheons would be presented in a way that could be used to flesh out an undersea world, desert realm, spiraling Necropolis, or whatever the DM can dream up.

The World of Greyhawk would be fleshed out, throughout the WBG, to provide examples. Other campaign settings would follow, using the WBG format.

After that, a proper fluff-heavy Greyhawk Gazetteer would follow; detailing locales, NPCs, and the rich history of Oerth. 

I'd much rather have a proper version of Greyhawk than a 'lite' version as the default setting.
4e D&D is not a "Tabletop MMO." It is not Massively Multiplayer, and is usually not played Online. Come up with better descriptions of your complaints, cuz this one means jack ****.
I would really want to have Greyhawk back, it's by far my favorite campaing setting, it has a somehow unique flavour. But I rather prefer to have it as a separate campaing world instead as of the default setting.

I would really want to have Greyhawk back, it's by far my favorite campaing setting, it has a somehow unique flavour. But I rather prefer to have it as a separate campaing world instead as of the default setting.




Agreed. About time GH came back as a standalone campaign setting with the treatment FR has had over the last 20 years or so (or Eberron over the last 10) while GH has had so very little.
The next edition needs its own default setting. But Greyhawk needs to make a comeback in a big way. It has largely (for some reason) been ignored in favor of the forgotten realms. During 3.x FR was getting an update every month. Greyhawk got nothing. Yes, there was Living Greyhawk in the RPGA, but supplement wise? Nada. Not even a campaign setting book to my knowledge. Even Dragonlance got more support, granted that was all through Margaret Weis Productions, but still, how can such an iconic setting get nothing?
The last Greyhawk campaing book (Living Greyhawk Gazetteer) was released almost 12 years ago, we're starving for a new Campaing Guide!
I would love to see a new release for Greyhawk and Blackmoor as well. 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Put me in the "bring Greyhawk back" column. I was part of the team that launched Living Greyhawk back in 2000 (Furyondy Triad FTW!) and that whole experience really deepened my appreciation for the "First Setting" of D&D. With this editions constant promise to "bring old players back to the table", Greyhawk would be like a huge, golden olive branch to anyone put off by 4Es divergent flavor.  
My recap. I am sure most people will disagree but this is based on what I liked in campaigns: lots of ambiguity. A place where no one sees themselves as evil, just misuderstood. A place where heroes aren't always heroic; if they are, they are short-lived. Fierce rilvary amongst human lands, where genocide is more of a threat than an invasion by humanoids. Mistrust.  Orders that try to rise above the constant infighting; none of these orders are sterling, but they do generally try to adhere to a principle. Humanoids that aren't mindless brutes, but no a direct confrontation with humanity will end in their extinction, so they don't always have that "See human/dwarf/elf, attack human/dwarf/elf" reaction.

 
World of Greyhawk: solid campaign setting that had a strong Tolkein influence: lots of human kingdoms with various alliances and wars, humanoid kingdoms, bandit kingdoms, etc. I enjoyed the variations of people (Baklunish, Flannish, etc), their deities, etc. For an early campaign, it set the bar for what I expected later on.

Forgotten Realms: Massive amount of lore and the best developed. It felt toned down compared to greyhawk, and even Ed Greenwood said he couldn't get TSR to allow him to explore some of the darker side as much as he wanted. Probably made good sense for them to do that for a business, but I would have liked for some of the characters to have been laess black and white (and so central/immortal). After the Godswar, something happened and it felt very fluffy. It lost its luster for me.

Dark Sun: Loved it when it first came out. It was gritty. Characters would die senseless deaths if they didn't have their wits about them or if they tried to be heroes. Character variation was incredible and characters didn't feel like they were clones in power. No one was truely good and even evil had a reason for doing what they did. Conflict abound as anyone was willing to stab you in the back to insure there own survival; friends were few and hard to come by. It jumped the shark when they introduced the biomechanical halflings. I guess they felt they ran out of apocalypse themed adventures with each more terrible than the last. If they kept them all petty survival than it would have added flavor showing the nihilism of the campaign world: a 1st level adventure fighting for water is just like a 19th level adventure fighting to find and keep water. 

Rokugan (L5R): This is another campaign that I enjoyed and it never went stale. I felt it had a great background, lots of flavor and crunch due to the license, and it felt viseral. I enjoyed the way each clan was distinct in appearance, ettiquette, fighting style, magic and attitude. Each clan had houses and families under it that showed a great deal of variety. All of this was supported by accessories and lots of great artwork that helped you see how there wasn't really a strong need to play anything other than a human because all of the variation was available in humans. Trade routes, constant political intrigue and open and not-so-open warfare...made for great role-playing, especially when your party was composed of members from different houses. I also liked that in most adventures, you would never encounter a monster, but fight a family or house to keep order in the lands for the emperor. It was great role-playing. And for the most amazing "hell on earth", there were the shadowlands that drew higher level players to it like moths to a fire. It reminds me of "Game of Thrones: Oriental Adventures edition"

Eberron: (the campaign I had the least exposure to) It had the potential for political grittiness that Greyhawk was known for but removed all similarities to Tolkein.  I liked the idea, but it pigeonholed most of the culture into the Houses, and there were too few with too little subdivisioning and little overlap: for instance, if you wanted to play an assassin, you were pretty much forced to be a member of a specific house and were probably an elf. In Rokugan, almost every clan had a family that specialized in espionage, each with their own modus operandi and crunchie perks to steer them to use it. If you wanted to be an assassin in Dark Sun, you could have been a Moon clan elf, or maybe a halfling, or a human with certain skills, or a bard. Those campaigns gave options withoug pigeon-holing. So the concepts in Eberron were good, it just didn't hit the depth and the overlap to make it great. Oh, it had great artwork too.

Nentir Valley/Points of Light: I enjoyed the maps. I enjoyed how they were able to put so much in such a small geographic area. I also liked some of the campaign hooks quite well. The weakness was it felt cramped and geared to a very young audience. It didn't have any of the grittiness of earlier campaigns. Sure there was this guy who secretly worshiped Tiamat or the longshoreman who was involved in racketeering, but it didn't have the sense of malignancy that other campaigns had, and as mentioned elsewhere the descriptions seemed to come out a Hardy boys/Nancy Drew book. Even though 4e aimed at 10+, no 11+ child wants to read at a 10 year olds level for more than a year or two. The campaign had the potential to develop young minds and teach new words and understand new concepts. The campaign also had no cities; only some villages and small towns. It was hard to slowly reveal a history, because there wasn't much written about it early on. It felt too much like the red box campaign setting for my taste. I did really enjoy the map and wish I had the photoshop brush set they created to make the maps.
Romulos, your opinions come pretty close to mine. Except I'd go further and say that FR really took a nosedive after 4E. The revised setting and the 100 year jump more or less ended the Forgotten Realms, and created ... Forgotten Realms, the Next Generation? Forgotten Realms 2000? Forgotten Realms Origins: Wolverine? A relaunch, anyway! And like many relaunches, it was ... Not good. 
As a newbie to D&D (IE, I've only been playing for two years and my first edition was 4e), I was wondering what's so great about Greyhawk? Don't get me wrong, I know that Greyhawk is a classic and, though I think that the Nentir Vale should be the default setting for 5e, I still think it should be brought back. But, I was wondering, what made it unique compared to other settings? I mean, Dark Sun has its defiling and Thri-Keen, Eberron has its Warforged and magitech, Spelljammer has its... everything. So what unique and cool features does Greyhawk have that the others don't?
Greyhawk is a classic fantasy setting in the Tolkien vein. Compared to just about every other D&D setting, it's "low fantasy"and feels very traditional. It's charm lies in that -- it's the setting where you can play in the old-fashioned fantasy vein and with the classic fantasy tropes.

It also had at its center the Free City of Greyhawk, which is sort of the grande dame of D&D fantasy cities.  You could run entire campaigns in the City and it's environs -- most notably the ruins of Castle Greyhawk. It's a spectacular setting. 

Finally, Greyhawk has at its core all the flavorful names in classic D&D. Mordenkainen, Bigby, Otiluke, Vecna, Iuz ... It was basically THE setting for D&D, created by Gygax himself. it's the original D&D.
Tolkein influences?
What Tolkein influences?
Are you sure you don't mean Fritz Leiber and Michael Moorcock influences?
Greyhawk is significant more them, and many similar authors, than Tolkein.
Of course that requires the caveat that Leiber, Moorcock, et al style adventures are absolutely unsuitable for organized play, or indeed the default group size commonly assumed, but that is a design topic of its own.

As for low fantasy, how?
Greyhawk has more than its fair share arch-liches, incarnate demi-powers, rampaging demon queens, archmages and the like rampaging about, leaving overpowered magic items scattered hither and yon.
Do not be fooled by the soothing anti-Monty Hall words of the AD&D DMG! Read those early modules and you will quickly see enough magic items laying about to choke not merely a herd of apatosauri, but al the T-Rexes showing up to snack on their now deceased dino buddies.
Greyhawk may not have had the same spread of name level+ retired adventurers running every inn, tavern, and blacksmith shop as FR, but it certainly managed its own neat bits of gratuitous magic hither an yon. 

I love Greyhawk, but I am fully aware that setting wars are as useless as edition wars, and that when it comes to published settings, all preferences ultimately come down to "Because I like what I can do with that one" rather than any fundamental differences. To quote myself from 8 years ago in these forums:
So what actually makes Greyhawk unique to me if I deny all of the above points? When it comes down to it, absolutely nothing. At the end of the day, it is just another setting, no better or worse, no more or less, than any other. The only thing that can make it any better is me. Combined with an almost total absence of anyone else doing anything with it, that gives me nearly total freedom to do as a I please without having to worry that some future product will require massive reworking for me to add to my game. So indeed, absolutely nothing, in terms of no, or at least extremely few, products for the setting is what makes Greyhawk unique. I wanted a world, or at least a starting point for a world. I paid for one called Greyhawk, and I've got it. Now I get to do what I want with it. That seems unique enough to me.
Samwise, you have completely misread what I wrote. 

1) I did not say "Tolkien Influences". I said, "in the Tolkien vein," meaning a classic fantasy, medieval-ensue setting with a human-dominated population, pockets of demihumans, lots of orcs, etc. Of all the established D&D campaign worlds, Greyhawk would probably be the easiest to stage the Lord of the Rings. To me, that's part of its charm. If you were to

2) I said low fantasy,  compared to other established campaigns. If you were to rank Greyhawk against FR, Ebberon, Planescape, etc., then I'd say Greyhawk would definitely stand out as the lowest fantasy, or nearly so. Again, as a more traditional campaign world, it's part of why I like it. no Thri-keen enclaves or Warforged or the rampant magical pervasiveness or FR, etc. 

 
I love Greyhawk, but I am fully aware that setting wars are as useless as edition wars, and that when it comes to published settings, all preferences ultimately come down to "Because I like what I can do with that one" rather than any fundamental differences. To quote myself from 8 years ago in these forums:
So what actually makes Greyhawk unique to me if I deny all of the above points? When it comes down to it, absolutely nothing. At the end of the day, it is just another setting, no better or worse, no more or less, than any other. The only thing that can make it any better is me. Combined with an almost total absence of anyone else doing anything with it, that gives me nearly total freedom to do as a I please without having to worry that some future product will require massive reworking for me to add to my game. So indeed, absolutely nothing, in terms of no, or at least extremely few, products for the setting is what makes Greyhawk unique. I wanted a world, or at least a starting point for a world. I paid for one called Greyhawk, and I've got it. Now I get to do what I want with it. That seems unique enough to me.



Completely and utterly agree. 

From my experience, every rehash of a campaign setting that TSR/WotC released has been worse than the original.  To a large extent it is because the rehash invalidates what I have done with the setting.  In Greyhawk's case, the Living Greyhawk Gazeteer may as well have been describing an entirely different setting than the decade+ of work that I have put into my Greyhawk.

On the other hand, if a rehash of Greyhawk means new Darlene maps - I will be all in.
As a newbie to D&D (IE, I've only been playing for two years and my first edition was 4e), I was wondering what's so great about Greyhawk? Don't get me wrong, I know that Greyhawk is a classic and, though I think that the Nentir Vale should be the default setting for 5e, I still think it should be brought back. But, I was wondering, what made it unique compared to other settings? I mean, Dark Sun has its defiling and Thri-Keen, Eberron has its Warforged and magitech, Spelljammer has its... everything. So what unique and cool features does Greyhawk have that the others don't?



What makes Greyhawk so great is that it is the base-line of D&D.  Greyhawk defines what "classic fantasy" means in D&D.

Perhaps the primary reason that Dark Sun or Eberron appear unique is precisely that they deviate from Greyhawk. 
I did not misread you, I simply disagree with you.

Romulos used "Tolkien influences", and my reply is as much in response to him as to you.
And I stand by it - Greyhawk shows significantly more influences of other fantasy authors, and vanishingly little of Tolkien, however much people like to use Tolkien as the standard to compare all fantasy to. There is a significant body of fantasy and pulp literature before Tolkien, and a significant body after him and before the modern era, and more than a little of both was read by Gygax and incorporated into the game.
As it goes, Birthright is much more Tolkien than Greyhawk, issues of "established" or not aside, and it would absolutely be easier to stage LotR in Cerilia than in Greyhawk.

As for low fantasy in comparison, I still disagree for the reasons I pointed out, and to which I could easily add more.
While Greyhawk is often portrayed as low fantasy, directly or by comparison, a careful examination swiftly reveals otherwise:
There is a wizard's guild and college of magic in the eponymous city founded by an ascended demipower.
There is a castle created by the same ascended demipower with the remnants of a prison that once held nine other deities, along with at least one random demon lord. 
There is a massive magical desert in one corner of the map, and a smaller magical desert in the middle.
There are gates to demiplanes in every third adventure, often incredibly over the top demiplanes.
There is a kingdom, or ruins thereof, with swarms of supra-powerful undead generals running hither and yon.
There is a not-so-secret society of dudes with fashion issues engaging in rampant magical breeding experiments.    
There is an imprisoned demon lady in a ruin.
There is an incarnate demonic demipower ruling the top sixth of the map.
Do I need more examples?
Okay, every third peasant doesn't have a magic heirloom socked away. How about just every sixth named NPC, is that enough?

However much people talk about those two elements of Greyhawk, I just don't, and never have, seen them demonstrated in the published materials. 
Romulos used "Tolkien influences", and my reply is as much in response to him as to you.
And I stand by it - Greyhawk shows significantly more influences of other fantasy authors, and vanishingly little of Tolkien, however much people like to use Tolkien as the standard to compare all fantasy to. There is a significant body of fantasy and pulp literature before Tolkien, and a significant body after him and before the modern era, and more than a little of both was read by Gygax and incorporated into the game.



This is absolutely right. Greyhawk was much more inspired by the works of Lieber, Vance and Howard then Tolkien. Not saying that no Tolkien existed in GH, just much less in terms of tone and pace. This is something people tend not to be aware of, and should look into more. Pick up an AD&D DMG and look at appendix N (I think?) with all the reading suggestions.

Read the Gord the Rogue books, read Tolkien and read Robert E. Howard. You'll find Gygax's writing style much more reminicient (if not on the same level) of Howard.

I will say though that Greyhawk is much more low magic compared to other settings, if not in specific content (as in, the modules at times) then at least in presentation and intention.
Learn about Liberty: http://www.youtube.com/user/LearnLiberty Free Market Capitalism is the truest, and best hope for man kind. IMAGE(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/Rumek_Testament/NeoGrognardextracroped.jpg) Visit my blog at: www.theneogrognard.blogspot.com
I will say though that Greyhawk is much more low magic compared to other settings, if not in specific content (as in, the modules at times) then at least in presentation and intention.


???
There are archmages falling out of the woodwork in Greyhawk.  Every regional book published has multiple archmages. 

Where in the Flaneass can one go to be more than 200 miles from an archmage?
I will say though that Greyhawk is much more low magic compared to other settings, if not in specific content (as in, the modules at times) then at least in presentation and intention.


???
There are archmages falling out of the woodwork in Greyhawk.  Every regional book published has multiple archmages. 

Where in the Flaneass can one go to be more than 200 miles from an archmage?



I'm referring to the original 1983 box and Gord the Rogue novels - material written by Gygax. There are those out there that don't look at anything non-Gygax for Greyhawk. I'm not exactly at that point, but there is a line I draw in the sand at a certain point.

What sourcebooks are you refering to specifically? I have quite a few of those sourcebooks and would be interested to see what you're talking about.

The only one I can figure is the City of Greyhawk box set, while detailing the circle of Eight. Even then, I'd hardly consider that to be "archmages falling out of the woodwork."
Learn about Liberty: http://www.youtube.com/user/LearnLiberty Free Market Capitalism is the truest, and best hope for man kind. IMAGE(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p157/Rumek_Testament/NeoGrognardextracroped.jpg) Visit my blog at: www.theneogrognard.blogspot.com