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.

 

[Maxperson]

show me the study that shows that 80% of males born between say 1935 and 1945 were sexist and then we talk.

Also, him being sexist might not have been an outlier, but even among the sexists a post like the one in Europa would have been an outlier, that is what definitely makes him one, whether being one already does is up for discussion

Nah. It's your claim, not mine. The burden of proof falls on you.

Also, I didn't make any claim of 80%, just like I didn't make a claim that the population was 100 million at that time. Those were clearly arbitrary numbers to show my point.

Asking for me to prove claims I did not make is a dodge on proving the actual claims you and others here have been making.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'm willing to bet imaginary money that by pure page count the #1 most discussed subject on this site is Gary's sexism.

and how much 5E Rangers suck.

How soon they forget...

< Pours a forty oz on the curb for "4E is trash", "LFQW", as well as countless other 3.XE-era subjects which had discussion threads which make this one look paltry >

Tears in the rain...

 

[mamba]

Nah. It's your claim, not mine. The burden of proof falls on you.

if you want to prove me wrong, you have a burden too. I am good with his letter from 1974 and my claim that most people would not have written that, even the sexist ones

 

[TiQuinn]

There’s no burden of proof on a message board. There’s arguments and whether someone chooses to accept the other’s argument or not.

 

[el-remmen]

@el-remmen Using laugh emojis in a mocking way is frowned upon. Use your words! I won't bite!

If I used a laughing emoji on one of your posts it was unintentional, unless you said something funny I’ve forgotten.

 

[Bedrockgames]

So, it being "speech" doesn't really enter into it. Speech is a tool of expression. What tool you are using isn't the important point. What harm is done is the important point.

I think we likely have a difference of view on this. I do think words, action, behavior, these are different things and I will certainly weigh them differently when it comes to harm (I.e. harm caused by a joke, is not the same in my mind as harm caused by a baseball bat)

If we were playing chess, and when I started losing, I hit you with a baseball bat, and said, "Well, I don't have a deeply held belief that Bedrockgames should be hit with baseball bats, but I really wanted to win this game of chess," the fact of the matter would be that I still hit you with a baseball bat, and your resulting concussion would still be a concussion. That I didn't have a deeply held belief on it doesn't change the fact of the matter.

But you are also hitting me with a baseball bat, not saying words. These things are not on the same level. The reason the baseball bat example is one where I would have no choice but to take it seriously is because it is basically attempted murder. I am a very forgiving man, but I unfortunately have to draw the line at 'you tried to kill me with a baseball bat'. Though in fairness I would hope the courts would take your mental state into account when assessing what to charge you with and how you ought to be sentenced.

Now if this weren't a baseball bat, but words, or possibly even a lesser form of violence. I would feel differently.

Moreover... the fact of the matter would be that I felt little enough about you that I thought it would be okay to hit you with a baseball bat to win a paltry game of chess! So, my claim about "deeply held beliefs" starts looking pretty flimsy. I would clearly have some beliefs that your value as a person is pretty low.

I wouldn't even know what your feelings are about me. I would just think you have rage issues and no impulse control. I wouldn't think I was all that important of a factor in your violent outburst. Likely you were going to fly off the handle at any opponent who outwitted you that day

LIkewise: If I were not playing chess against you, and instead with my trans friend, and I tossed some slurs at her, knowing they'd hurt and shake her up, to win the game, well, she'd still be mightily hurt, and clearly my beliefs of her value as a person would clearly be pretty low...

First off, I wouldn't defend throwing slurs at someone like I said before. But I would also say if we are talking about the tactic used in sports, I wouldn't necessarily think it reflected your beliefs about trans people (more likely it shows what lengths you are willing to go to get an edge, up to and including saying something hurtful to a competitor). I have a physical disability. And it is relevant to stuff like boxing. If I were sparring with a friend and he knew about it, and used a slur for disabled people to get under my skin, or tried to draw negative attention to it in some way, personally I am not going to reach the conclusion that he has negative views towards people with disabilities. I am going to see it as the tactic it was. Doesn't mean I am going to be happy with the person. But I am going to draw a distinction if they are saying something to get under my skin and get an edge in a exchange, versus if they are saying something because they want me to know that is how they feel about it.

Of course I think we are getting lost in the example because I don't think, to @Ruin Explorer's point, this really ties to the Gygax examples very well (he wasn't trying to get an edge in a sporting competition when he said the things in question).

 

[Bedrockgames]

Gygax by his own account engaged in conscious misogyny though so is it really okay for people to see it as a "slight", rather than an unfortunate fact?

If I wrote into a magazine and said "I'm a racist" and then explained in detail how I was a racist, and then later I was talking about how I believed in biological essentialism and that races were inherently different, and I refused to take any of it back would it be wrong to say "Yo that dude was racist" about me?

I realize we probably disagree about the quote in question, but I really don't read the "I am sexist" remark as something I would take at face value. Simply because so few people are that cartoonishly villainous. To me it read as a build of of frustration and him basically saying "Fine, I am a sexist" and unloading. I do think he had sexist views and some of them may have come out in that exchange, but a declaration like this one, is something I take with a grain of salt.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

If I used a laughing emoji on one of your posts it was unintentional, unless you said something funny I’ve forgotten.

I say a lot of funny things that even I have forgotten.

Good! You're a poster who I have a lot of respect for and I would be disappointed if that wasn't reciprocated.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Sure, but You’ll notice I kept to large geographical regions in the U.S. And I did so solely in respect to what was normal at the time. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable observation or nuance to bring into the conversation.

Well, yes, it was an exaggeration, though a slight one.

Speaking of, for the most part we are only comparing to u.s. or western civilization viewpoints on women at the time (which I think is fair even if missing a bit of context). But If you count Middle East, Russia, China, India, etc then I think the norm at that time would be much different.

I mean, if you start by excluding 50% of the population (all women), I’m not sure you get a pat on the back for saying « I think we can all agree that Mr. Gygax was less sexist than men in countries were women weren’t allowed to vote. »

 

[Bedrockgames]

If someone says something in anger and then pridefully refuses to retract it, how are they not putting conscious, non-angry force behind it?

For real here. How is that not explicitly being sexist due to being too prideful to ever apologize for the harmful things you (generic you) have said?

Because it might not be something that guides their actions in real life. People say things all the time on forums, in books, etc as a result of arguments, a result of pride, that don't always reflect how they conduct themselves in everyday interactions. Peoples pride gets in the way of them apologizing. I am willing to bet most people here have been victims of their own pride.

I can't. I genuinely cannot understand that. If you have erred, and you know you have erred, and that error has led others to believe you think something you don't, or has led you to say something harmful which you regret, SAY IT. Say, "What I said was wrong, and I'm sorry for the harm I caused by saying it. Those are not my beliefs. I believe that any woman can be just as helpful or harmful at a game table as any man could be. I won't be revising my books to include more names of women, but it's something I can think about for future work."

If you stick to your guns when you KNOW your guns are wrong, when you KNOW you fired them only in anger in a way that you actually do oppose down to your bones, all you are doing is making the situation worse.

When you've realized you've dug yourself into a hole, the correct response is to STOP DIGGING. If you keep digging because you're too proud to admit that you got stuck in a hole, you are knowingly making the situation worse. Which--per your own arguments!--reflects the person inside.

By this logic, his pride, his self-image as a resolute person, was more important than not saying harmful things about women. That--that thing RIGHT there--is a perfect example of being a sexist dick.

Because very few people admit when they were wrong. I have admitted when I feel I have been wrong on forum threads before. It is isn't an easy thing to do. Especially if people are accusing a person of being something society considers morally bad. Also a lot of times when this stuff is unfolding, the people making the accusation engage in their own bad behavior and that makes the person digging in feel justified. Generally speaking I think the solution is for everyone to take a step back and take big breath.