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.

 

[Steampunkette]

Then you are going to lose money.

I think you're right!

D&D General - A glimpse at WoTC's current view of Rule 0

While looking at the educator resources over on D&D beyond, I stumbled upon WoTC's current (and free) intro adventure for new (and mostly younger) players Peril in Pinebrook. Like the starter sets this adventure has a rules primer along with it and a decent size section on how to run the game...

www.enworld.org

This is a 118 page thread (with 25/page) on Rule 0. That's already almost twice the size of this thread!

I'm sure there's a lot more discussion about Rule 0 scattered across various threads and topics!

 

[Umbran]

Again I think you are attributing things that aren't present in what I am saying.

I repeat - we have seen the same logic and rhetoric used to try to extract forgiveness.

When we write, there are three texts - what the writer intends, what actually is on the page, and what the reader gets from it.

If the stuff on the page looks exactly like things we have seen frequently in the past, well, there you go.

I am taking the approach I am in order to understand people more.

1) Unfortunately, that's what every actual sealion would say. So, you are not yet differentiating yourself from them.

2) Consider the possibility that this is a very bad approach to learning from folks on the internet.*

Have you considered that your approach is actually bad for that purpose.

In this case what Gygax meant.

You cannot learn what Gygax meant from us. We are not Gygax. We can show you texts of Gygax you may have been unaware of. We can tell you our own interpretations of what those texts mean.

If you are going to always reject our interpretations, there's not much point to the exercise.

I think it is pretty self evident that when someone says something in anger, they may say things that don't reflect the totality of their beliefs.

I don't see how you repeatedly asserting such has anything to do with you learning anything.



* The method here looks pseudo-Socratic. What many fail to realize is that the Socratic method isn't a thing Socrates used to learn the truth. It is one he (semi-fictionally) used to teach the truth.

 

[mamba]

Well the one tangible thing Musk definitely accomplished is that I just bought the book…

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think you're right!

D&D General - A glimpse at WoTC's current view of Rule 0

While looking at the educator resources over on D&D beyond, I stumbled upon WoTC's current (and free) intro adventure for new (and mostly younger) players Peril in Pinebrook. Like the starter sets this adventure has a rules primer along with it and a decent size section on how to run the game...

www.enworld.org

This is a 118 page thread (with 25/page) on Rule 0. That's already almost twice the size of this thread!

I'm sure there's a lot more discussion about Rule 0 scattered across various threads and topics!

I wouldn't even take seriously the suggestion that it's the most discussed topic on this sub forum this month.

The method here looks pseudo-Socratic. What many fail to realize is that the Socratic method isn't a thing Socrates used to learn the truth. It is one he (semi-fictionally) used to teach the truth.

Yeah...it always confuses me how folks fail to realize that the Socratic method is an argument, not an analysis.

I guess because it starts out as questions, until you get someone to eventually admit they don't know, and then you start offering alternatives? For the sincere practitioner, doing so expecting that they will then respond to you with armor-piercing questions of their own.

 

[dbolack]

No. That is also not the case. The tone of that letter is, "This is how I was I was raised. This is how I am. This is how I will continue to be." It is not indicative that he thinks he is in the minority, just that he feels called out and is going to stick to his guns.

I would also argue, he seemed rather proud of it in that particular call-out response.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

That you suggested it was my "Aggressive" posting that made him think that, rather than that user supporting the "Good fight" against trans people which they openly mentioned in a post.

And do you think I should unblock him and subject myself to his positions and be willing to deal with potential misgendering and other microaggressions or should I keep him on my ignore list?

'Cause you've been -big- on never ignoring anyone, but I figured a clear case where I could wind up being outright harassed by someone who thinks I'm a man might sway your position.

But I'm open to being wrong.

To me, someone being obviously aggressive and abusive is a different animal than 'that person annoys me'. At that point, I would contact the site's moderation to see about banning that person. There is normal human friction, then there is that.

Although I would still honestly have it out with that person. But I understand a line being crossed.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I repeat - we have seen the same logic and rhetoric used to try to extract forgiveness.

When we write, there are three texts - what the writer intends, what actually is on the page, and what the reader gets from it.

If the stuff on the page looks exactly like things we have seen frequently in the past, well, there you go.

Any type of rhetoric or analysis can be misused. Keep in mind, I am getting feedback from other posters to, not just yourself. In my opinion, you are misreading what I am saying or are connecting it to things I am not connecting it to. That said, I am taking great effort to clearly explain my position so it is understood.

1) Unfortunately, that's what every actual sealion would say. So, you are not yet differentiating yourself from them.

I don't think I am sealioning here. But because that is against forum rules, if you feel I am please let me know as a mod so I can bow out of the thread because I don't want to get red texted. My sense of my own interactions with people is I have been firm about my position but considered and responded to as many points as I can when people have weighed in. And I don't think my position is that out there: I essentially agree with Heidi Gygax's post (something I have said many times) and have said regarding the quotes, I think it is important to consider tone, intent, in gauging whether they reflected his sincere beliefs or how fully they reflected his beliefs (you will note I have agreed some things he has said seem sexist to me). To me this is just good practice when examining a primary document. It doesn't mean my analysis is always going be right, or that it is right in this instance. But I am always going to try to assess all the factors I can that went into a text (because you have to consider those things if you are to understand them). I

2) Consider the possibility that this is a very bad approach to learning from folks on the internet.*

Have you considered that your approach is actually bad for that purpose.

I always consider such things. I think it may not be a great fit at EnWorld for sure. But in terms of understanding other people it has served me very well in life, in my studies when I was a student, in my research as a writer, etc.

Also my aim here is to understand what a person says in their writing, not to learn from people on the internet. I am not sure I understand why you are bringing this up

You cannot learn what Gygax meant from us. We are not Gygax. We can show you texts of Gygax you may have been unaware of. We can tell you our own interpretations of what those texts mean.

Yes, and I have listened to different interpretations of his text. And where I have agreed, I have said so, where I have disagreed I have said so

If you are going to always reject our interpretations, there's not much point to the exercise.

I haven't rejected every interpretation. But this is a two way street. I am not obligated to accept all of your interpretations, you aren't obligated to accept mine. Sometimes the best we can hope for is understanding what one another's interpretations are

I don't see how you repeatedly asserting such has anything to do with you learning anything.

Again I am not sure why you are framing this as an issue of learning when the aim is to understand a person and what they said.

* The method here looks pseudo-Socratic. What many fail to realize is that the Socratic method isn't a thing Socrates used to learn the truth. It is one he (semi-fictionally) used to teach the truth.

I respect you as a mod and poster, and just so you know I like interacting with you here. You seem like a very decent person. But I don't see you as my teacher. I see you as a fellow poster and I think we can both learn from each other

 

[DarkCrisis]

Then you are going to lose money.

Good thing I’m a multi billionaire in imaginary money.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I thought a lot like this at times in the past and then I remember the Wisdom of James Wallis. "Life's too short to deal with F*Wits." You don't owe anyone discourse.

It's not about owing anyone discourse. It's about not putting up walls in society.

And about not branding people you disagree with as F*Wits. That's a good place to start!

 

[dbolack]

ENWorlders can turn almost anything into a 100-page thread.

How long was the debate about whether anything could be turned into a 100 page thread?