Elon Musk Calls for Wizards of the Coast to "Burn in Hell" Over Making of Original D&D Passages

Elon Musk, the owner of the app formerly known as Twitter, is calling on Wizards of the Coast and its parent company Hasbro to "burn in hell" for the publication of Making of Original Dungeons & Dragons. On November 21st, former gaming executive turned culture warrior Mark Hern posted several passages from Making of Original Dungeons & Dragons on Twitter, criticizing the book for providing context about some of the misogyny and cultural insensitivity found in early rulebooks. These passages were pulled from the foreword written by Jason Tondro, a senior designer for the D&D team who also worked extensively on the book. Hern stated that these passages, along with the release of the new 2024 Player's Handbook and Dungeon Master's Guide for D&D's "40th anniversary" (it is actually D&D's 50th anniversary) both "erased and slandered" Gary Gygax and other creators of Dungeons & Dragons.

In response, Musk wrote "Nobody, and I mean nobody, gets to trash E. Gary Gygax and the geniuses who created Dungeons & Dragons. What the [naughty word] is wrong with Hasbro and WoTC?? May they burn in hell." Musk had played Dungeons & Dragons at some point in his youth, but it's unclear when the last time he ever played the game.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, gets to trash E. Gary Gygax and the geniuses who created Dungeons & Dragons. What the [xxxx] is wrong with Hasbro and WoTC?? May they burn in hell.

- Elon Musk​

Notably, Making of Original Dungeons & Dragons contains countless correspondences and letters written by both Gygax and Dave Arneson, including annotated copies of early D&D rulesets. Most early D&D rules supplements as well as early Dragon magazines are also found in the book. It seems odd to contain one of the most extensive compliations of Gygax's work an "erasure," but it's unclear whether Hern or Musk actually read the book given the incorrect information about the anniversary.

Additionally, Gygax and Arneson are both credited in the 2024 Player's Handbook and Dungeon Master's Guide. The exact credit reads: "Building on the original game created by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson and then developed by many others over the past 50 years." Wizards of the Coast also regularly collaborates with Gygax's youngest son Luke and is a participant at Gary Con, a convention held in Gygax's honor. The opening paragraph of the 2024 Player's Handbook is written by Jeremy Crawford and specifically lauds both Gygax and Arneson for making Dungeons & Dragons and contains an anecdote about Crawford meeting Gygax.

Musk has increasingly leaned into culture war controversies in recent years, usually amplifying misinformation to suit his own political agenda.

 

[Jahydin]

Until she weighs in, I would avoid deciding we know too much about what she thinks of this issue.

Yes, she played with them repeatedly as a kid and she got a book signed.

That doesn't tell us much, in the end.

Right, I didn't mean to speak for her in any way.

Just one of many of my own observations of his conduct. How he actually was is more important to me than how others think he was. Especially when the main body of evidence is a single quote made sarcastically and hyperbolically.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The point of Musk commenting on this is not actually to defend Gygax or D&D, it's to defend sexism against being called out.

That's what this whole fight is actually about: protecting the institution of sexism from being torn down via discussion and analysis of it's historical permutations. Whether people incited through the invocation of a beloved figure or hobby know what they're being pushed to do or not.

 

[mamba]

I don't think you get a complete picture from the outside though either. People aren't consistent.

no one said he was nothing but a sexist

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Are you able to have a discussion?

Because a discussion where truly every single possible opinion is equally valid is an instantaneous dead end. The discussion is eliminated before it can even begin.

I sure am! Not following you here though... what discussion is being shut down exactly? What I'm advocating for is listening to what others are saying instead of shutting them down and insulting them.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

@darjr I see you added a sad face emoji to this post. Why is that?

Well, I'm not darjr, but I felt a sentiment in that direction because you had quite clearly missed the point of the poem.

It's calling out actual narcissistic behavior, by making it plain and explicit. It isn't excusing or diminishing anything. It's putting, in pithy and explicit form, the process by which narcissistic people control, manipulate, abuse, and hurt those close to them. It is, in fact, a poetic form of DARVO: "Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender." This is a term from the actual psychological study of people who have hurt others (e.g. sex offenders), which describes the three main steps that abusers take when responding to criticism. First, they deny that there was a problem (the poem lists several different methods of denial). The final line is the attack ("you deserved it"). Reversal of victim and offender, I admit, is less obvious, but the middle portion plausibly looks like it ("it's not my fault" -> "it is your fault", which is victim-blaming, as is the final line.)

The poem is calling out the bull$#!+ that people with narcissistic personality disorder inflict on their victims.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I mentioned Terry Brooks earlier. He’s 80 years old. Cis white man. A couple months ago when I spoke with him, he said even back when he was in college, he supported equal rights and it wasn’t some shocking new thing. People knew right from wrong in that context.

Moral relativism is a thing, sure. But people still knew it was wrong. Not sign of the times or times were different then. You knew it was wrong then, you just got away with it and were accepted for it then.

 

[Morrus]

Somebody definitely needs to write a "What did that foreword [FORWARD!] actually say?" article because I feel like 99% of the discussion about it is about what people who don't have the book imagine it says. Because it makes some observations about a work; it doesn't call people names or 'slander' anybody or call anybody a misogynist. And it doesn't, as Musk seems to have imagined--he clearly hasn't read the book, just saw a tweet about it--"trash" Gary Gygax. It certainly doesn't, as some people have feverishly imagined, call the fanbase bad for liking older editions of D&D.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I sure am! Not following you here though... what discussion is being shut down exactly? What I'm advocating for is listening to what others are saying instead of shutting them down and insulting them.

It pretty clearly seems like you are shutting people down though.

Nobody is allowed to just frankly talk about Gygax's work containing sexist elements. That's not okay. You can only talk about him positively, or by mixing more positive than negative in what you say. A thread can't simply be talking about the negative things and what we can do about them. It has to be "nuanced".

Note, for example, that not one of the people calling for "nuance" has challenged anyone who dismisses the criticisms out of hand. Not one of them has said, "Hey, actually, we should really pay attention to this because, as much good as he's done, we can't just turn a blind eye to bad stuff he did too."

Why is that? Why is it that the calls for "nuance" only get pulled out when there's criticism involved?

Especially when, as I noted above, literally everyone in this thread (to the best of my knowledge) has had a conversation about Gary Gygax at some point....where they didn't say one word about sexism, or racism, or bigotry, or anything like that. Meaning that un-nuanced conversations that are positive toward Gygax are apparently okay. But un-nuanced conversations that are negative are apparently unacceptable. Where does this asymmetry arise?

 

[mamba]

Have you heard of sarcasm?

yes, if this were a single incident you’d probably have a point. He was consistent on that for 40+ years however, so it was not sarcasm, or at a minimum only small parts of it

 

[Steampunkette]

Okay. We're trying to achieve a basic concept of civility and reasonability and you're seeking warfare and nuclear destruction seemingly.

Now that you've gotten that off your chest, are you able to have a discussion?

Your points are understood, appreciated and sympathised with. But when you come to the table, please be able to see your opponent as something else than an opponent.

You can take your patronizing attitude and bury it with Gygax, please and thank you!