TSR Rob Kuntz Recounts The Origins Of D&D

In this interesting article from Kotaku, Rob Kuntz relates a history of early TSR that differs somewhat from the narrative we usually hear. It delves into the relationship between Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson (D&D's co-creators) and the actual development of the game, which dates back to Arneson in 1971.

hl9tabacful74fpqzzkx.png

In this interesting article from Kotaku, Rob Kuntz relates a history of early TSR that differs somewhat from the narrative we usually hear. It delves into the relationship between Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson (D&D's co-creators) and the actual development of the game, which dates back to Arneson in 1971.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Wolfpack48

Adventurer
ad hominem. Who disagrees? There were only 6 people there. 2 are dead who never disagreed with me. My brother's PC was the only death and he remembers it well as he sat out the remaining part of the adventure until he could play in Dungeon, afterwards. Ernie sat to my right and was a fighter and battled the troll and the ogres and balrogs like the rest of us did. Will he disagree? Will Megarry who lead the adventure and still retains his maps and notes from it disagree, our leader who suggested we flee to the outdoor to escape from the wizard who fireballed Terry's PC and who was in hot pursuit of us as we fled Blackmoor Castle? So. Who are all of these mysterious people who were not there who will now disagree?

Well, we know at least one person arguing with you who definitely wasn't there, anyway. ;)
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
You know, I was being graceful, but then you had to do that. So, you asked.

1. The reason the original article on Kotaku (and, presumably, the upcoming documentary) are attracting some attention is because they are using your quotes. It does sound like you're being a little self-aggrandizing (you are quoted, paraphrased, as saying "Everything (other people) know about the creation of the tabletop role-playing game is, in (Kuntz's) opinion, sorely mistaken or flat-out wrong."). Or how about "(r)egardless, Kuntz describes himself as the first 'dungeon master.'" Or "(Gygax) was jealous. Just stone-cold jealous."

2. Now, you have a lot of first-hand experience! But are you saying, now, that all the other people (like Gygax) agree with your current characterizations? That Gygax was just stone-cold jealous, for instance?

3. Or how do you square your recent descriptions of Arneson at TSR and how he left with what Kask said, and with what Peterson reported based on conteporaneous documents (for instance)?

4. And how can you claim experience in one thing (the experience at being at the table) to then say that you fully understood the two years before you met Arneson?

A lot of this is complicated. A lot of this suffers from people with agendas, and differing memories, and hurt that can still linger. I can understand that, just like I respect you for the seminal role you played in my favorite game (it's not Gygax and Arneson, it's Gygax and Arneson and Kuntz and Kask and Ward and so many artists and so many many others ...), and I love to hear what you have to say!

But it doesn't mean that I uncritically accept you theories. Just like I didn't accept it when Gygax said that Tolkien had little to no influence on D&D. Or failed to mention where Chainmail came from.

Dude. Calm down. You’re being incredibly aggressive.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
I look on it as Dave was an ideas man but Gary could produce something.

Gary was no saint either he was a product of his time and did the dirty on his children's mother. He also liked being all about Gary.

Since he also fell out with just about everyone at some point it's another factor to look at.

Rob was it you who had Robilar? I have read accounts of early D&D play and force marching captives into traps.

Parts if the 1st Ed DMG regarding slave soldiers and loyalty and morale start making more sense.
 




Zardnaar

Legend
I don't mind answering his questions however hard or soft they are. I've faced a lot worse invective and this doesn't come close. But I will bow to your moderation if that's your slant, of course. I'm not bothered by the questions and can work around the emotions as needed, his or mine.

Old school I like it. Lowkeys usually alright. Just mention Gnome Paladin's dual wielding rapiers. It's his favorite topic.
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
Honestly, while I’d love to go back in time and see how those sessions grew, that’s not gonna happen, so I guess it’s all moot. We all hear from various sides and make our own conclusions. From everything I’ve heard and seen over the years, I always had the impression Gary was Edison to Dave’s Tesla. In several ways. But even if I’m wrong, that won’t change anything about how I play the game, and am thankful for all the early people involved (especially to Rob and Mike Monard, both of whom have been very open about their experiences).
 

I look on it as Dave was an ideas man but Gary could produce something.

Gary was no saint either he was a product of his time and did the dirty on his children's mother. He also liked being all about Gary.

Since he also fell out with just about everyone at some point it's another factor to look at.

Rob was it you who had Robilar? I have read accounts of early D&D play and force marching captives into traps.

Parts if the 1st Ed DMG regarding slave soldiers and loyalty and morale start making more sense.

You know this whole Gary vs. Dave thing has to end. Unfortunately some truths have to come out to end it, and some people just don't want to hear them. There is no need to have lowballed Arneson in the past and if things were equal no need to refute the inspection of his history. Stand it its way if one does not wish at this point to determine the truth. I see it as a balance, that is all, period. Ultimately It is something that will not and should not be settled on an internet board. I am just recalling relatively minor pieces (from my view) of what I have seen, heard, experienced as well the impressions I got. I was on the phone today with a querist, a rather important one in fact in the scope of things, and was asked a question about Gary. I said right up front that my answer was my impression, my opinion on that singular subject and qualified it for knowing Gary's person, having been almost adopted by the family and knowing his ways as his student. In all it is still my impression but it is what I believe to have substance. For those who weren't there during my moments, hey, more power to them for having less impressions but, instead, full knowledge about them!

As Robilar, yes, I rolled him on Gary's kitchen table and can even tell you where the name derives from, but that is not documented and people might disagree with that memory... ;) The story you recall, in part, involves my play-test of ToH. Even Gary got wrong the number of orcs I took with me--I took 5. We got to the entry tunnel and I stopped, not liking the look of things. So I ordered an orc forward into it as a scout. Gary rolled the dice and the orc refused my command to go forward. I drew my sword and killed it on the spot. Then I looked at another orc, sword still drawn, and ordered it forward and it (surprise, surprise) complied immediately. This was repeated until all four orcs ere killed by the pit traps (I chose badly for all four). I then entered by myself. BTW--as this adventure occurred so long ago I am sure mysterious people will challenge my recollection of it... Funny how selective agreeing works... Other than that I never abused my henchmen or MAA, etc.with such tactics, but due to Gary's relish in wanting me to come over and playtest his new creation (I was the co-DM of GH then and we always traded playtesting new levels, his or mine) I was on guard during such times and doubly cautious...
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top