TSR Q&A with Gary Gygax

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the multi-year Q&A sessions held by D&D co-creator Gary Gygax here at EN World, beginning in 2002 and running up until his sad pasing in 2008. Gary's username in the thread below is Col_Pladoh, and his first post in this long thread is Post #39.

Gary_Gygax_Gen_Con_2007.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax
trollwad said:
I guess I dont really understand your comment about "different creative ideas and marketing ideas" vis a vis you and rob. What difference would rob's ideas on marketing have on this project? Hadnt the general form (dark chateau plus 10 or so books) been set for a long time? I am generally aware of his new "sponsored projects" initiative on his website. Was he trying to change the published form of Zagyg?

With respect to the different creative ideas part, Im a little surprised by that as well. Was there something in Dark Chateau that you disagreed with (I thought it was good). Comparing Dark Chateau to the other 20 things written by you that I own, there are certainly differences in your writing styles (most obviously: GG is the master of brevity with the Steading at 8 pages, Hommlet at 32 pages, etc.), but Im not quite sure I see that many giant creative differences. Rob is probably a bit more "ornate" in his encounters whereas you tend to leave a bit more to the DM, but that didnt seem like a giant discrepancy.

I'm not trying to arouse any animosity between the two of you (and Im not trying to say anything nasty about Rob other than express disappointment that my favorite project will be delayed again), I am just trying to understand what happened. I'm curious whether you think Dark Chateau is a viable entry point to the Castle Zagyg that you envision or whether you think it would be wise to start elsewhere.
Beg pardon, but I am not going to discuss such matters in this sort of forum.

In point of fact, though, differing ideas as how to proceed have great meaning when one demands that one's particular notions be adhered to rather than the originally agreed-to format or else participation in the project will be withdrawn.

Cheers,
Gary
 

log in or register to remove this ad

trollwad

First Post
Thats understandable since it is so easy for mere statements like "we disagree creatively about x" to degenerate into disputes over the Internet and in hindsight it probably makes sense to avoid too much discussion. My main curiousity is really just seeing what exactly your differences in creative content are with Rob are not to denigrate anyone.

Maure Castle, as an example (which I also generally like, moreso the original rather than the add-ons), does not seem so terribly different from say Tsojcanth or the Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun. The two seem more stylistically similar than most 2e or 3e modules for example.

Oh well, no offense intended, it just seems curious that two people with such an incredibly long history together would be stylistically dissimilar.
 

ColonelHardisson

What? Me Worry?
trollwad said:
Oh well, no offense intended, it just seems curious that two people with such an incredibly long history together would be stylistically dissimilar.

"Creative differences" is pretty common when it comes to matters that are, well, creative in nature. Creative people generally have very definite points of view and like anything they're involved in to be just so. Look at all the bands that have disintegrated due to "creative differences." It just means people don't see eye-to-eye about something in the creative process. Trying to nail down exactly what those creative differences entail is a futile endeavor, as they often include a lot of personal differences.
 

BluSponge

Explorer
Col_Pladoh said:
I have no sympathy for GMs that, given a detailed workd setting, its economics, politics, and all the rest, are unable to make up adventures suitable for their own campaign :]

Must your hand be held constantly? :p

No, but I like a cookie every now and then. Button soup gets old after awhile. :p

Tom
 

Mystaros said:
As for the OGL and d20 System, well, they won't care. They can't stop it anymore, and, frankly, the market that remains for it is beneath their notice. They will be no more concerned with the players of 3.0/3.5 than they are for the 1.0 or 2.0 fans... and the small industry that remains, dedicated to d20/OGL offshoots, will be no competition.

I wonder if D&D can be rescued? Perhaps the rights can be bought by a gaming company, or some Super Friends alliance like White Wolf, Goodman, and Troll Lords?
 

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax
trollwad said:
...

Oh well, no offense intended, it just seems curious that two people with such an incredibly long history together would be stylistically dissimilar.
No offense taken :D

For the major differences in question see my earlier response.

Cheers,
Gary
 

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax
trollwad said:
...

Oh well, no offense intended, it just seems curious that two people with such an incredibly long history together would be stylistically dissimilar.
No offense taken :D

For the major differences in question see my earlier response. It iis not style that is in question but rather format and marketing.

Cheers,
Gary
 

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax
BluSponge said:
No, but I like a cookie every now and then. Button soup gets old after awhile. :p

Tom
Clearly you are not made of the stern stuff from which desigers and able GMs are built :lol:

Cheers,
Gary
 

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax
haakon1 said:
I wonder if D&D can be rescued? Perhaps the rights can be bought by a gaming company, or some Super Friends alliance like White Wolf, Goodman, and Troll Lords?
:lol:

The price for the mark and copyrights would surely be in the range of at least seven figures.
there is a lot of licensing potential in them, especially in the area of mass entertainment.

Cheers,
Gary
 

Esteemed Colonel,

In another discussion, a question has arisen regarding certain "game-changing" 5th-level spells that typically become available at 9th level.

Those "game-changing" spells (1) allow you to travel vast distances (teleport), (2) allow you to thwart death (raise dead), and (3) allow you to tap the knowledge of the gods to get information (commune).

The question is, did you deliberately design (original) D&D so that these "game-changing" spells would become available precisely at 9th level? In other words, precisely when the PCs reach Name Level, they get access to "game-changing" spells -- was this intentional, or a fortuitous accident?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top