Greyhawk Monster Index

[BOZ]

grodog - i think shade repeated those here because diaglo mentioned them in the other thread. i don't think i have to remind you of the longstanding debate that some folk contend that all 1E material is essentially greyhawk first and foremost.

 

[Shade]

I9 contained no new monsters. that's why i left it blank on the other thread.

are you gonna include all the other 2edADnD adventures and sourcebooks i listed?

I updated I9 to state "no new monsters". I intentionally left of some of the sourcebooks that didn't contain true "monsters", like paladins and so on. However, I'm sure I missed some since the thread was so long. I'll look back through the thread, and please let me know if you notice any particular supplements I'm missing.

 

[Shade]

MM2 - Catlord (page 22; mentions his only known friend is the goddess Xan Yae)
MM2 - Dragonell (page 60; mentions that it's pretty much extinct except in the Pomarj area)
MM2 - Hordling (page 75; mentions the infamous Bringer of Doom artifact)

I can add these with a note that this was their first appearance.

FWIW, none of these modules were ever set in Greyhawk, they're generic RPGA adventures. Some of the monsters listed were also published first in the Fiend Folio (most of which were first published in White Dwarf before it became a house organ for GW).

If this is the case, I'll remove 'em.

Also, a general question, Shade: are you compiling a concordance of GH monster appearances (where you list ever time a monster appears, such as Kuo Toa in EX1), vs. a listing for when they were first published (which would be D2 for the Kuo Toa, of course)?

Honestly, I was just attempting to compile everything in that thread and work from there. If something is clearly the first appearance, then we can eliminate the duplication. Since I don't have many of these sources, I don't know which appearances were first.

Some additions for you:

Dragon Magazine

Demonic Knights of Doom (Dragon 59)
Grugach and Valley Elves (Dragon 67)
Time Elemental (Dragon 69)
Obsidian Dragon (Dragon 146)
Snow Elves (Dragon 155)
Yak Men (Dragon 241)

Thanks, I'll add 'em.

That's actually Yellow Musk Creeper

Hee. I'll fix it.

These also weren't ever set in Greyhawk. I7 was adopted into Greyhawk, and I9 is semi-Greyhawk related, since the Cup and Talisman are GH artifacts (though the module itself isn't really set in GH, it can be set easily in Baklunish lands).

I'll leave those based on the logic that BOZ posted.

IIRC, these weren't specifically set in GH either. The only one that I own is UK6, which was a rather under-rated adventure and I've used it several times for Suloise areas within the Sea of Dust

Same with these.

 

[grodog]

grodog - i think shade repeated those here because diaglo mentioned them in the other thread. i don't think i have to remind you of the longstanding debate that some folk contend that all 1E material is essentially greyhawk first and foremost.

Heh, no, no need to open that can of worms. If you're working from this premise, then I would definitely include all of the C-series modules, too, Shade

 

[Shade]

Heh, no, no need to open that can of worms. If you're working from this premise, then I would definitely include all of the C-series modules, too, Shade

Cool. I've got enough worms to deal with from the last can I opened.

 

[Alzrius]

Yak Men (Dragon 241)

For what it's worth, the article referenced there is an Al-Qadim "Campaign Classics" article on the Yak-men, with a section that describes the Yak-men in other campaigns; before that article, they were AQ-exclusive. It might be worth noting then that they were given stats elsewhere (either the AQ boxed set, or its MC appendix), since the article doesn't reprint them.

 

[Shade]

For what it's worth, the article referenced there is an Al-Qadim "Campaign Classics" article on the Yak-men, with a section that describes the Yak-men in other campaigns; before that article, they were AQ-exclusive. It might be worth noting then that they were given stats elsewhere (either the AQ boxed set, or its MC appendix), since the article doesn't reprint them.

Will do.

 

[grodog]

Thanks for the correction, Alzrius. When I finally got around to checking out that article, I saw that it was not pure GH.