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.

 

[Justice and Rule]

No, I would say it's pretty much always foolish to complain about such things.

You're generally right, but I'm sure there's a situation where you could get someone who has a book and they legitimately say something stupid (like if the writer of this foreword said that, actually, Gygax was totally right or something). But yeah, that basically starts these sorts of arguments because most people don't take those works seriously and don't often want to give them the extra publicity.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I don't make this assumption at all.



Again when there isn't a comment, I look for context, or further information, to form a judgement about why the post was retweeted or reposted

This is just an argument for clarity and presenting the context. Again, that's what a foreword is for.

 

[billd91]

Some of it is context. If I follow someone who loves marshmallow fluff and that person retweets a post by someone denigrating marshmallow fluff, my assumption will probably be they want to draw attention to an opinion they thing is stupid.

And if it's just a retweet without commentary, why would you assume they think the tweet is stupid? If this were your first interaction with the person, which is going to be the case for a lot of people with lots of tweets or other social media posts - would you know that? What evidence would you have to you assume that?
It's just bizarre to think that people use social media so ironically without commentary that they're simply reposting and amplifying things they disagree with.

 

[Parmandur]

I don't think it's an age thing at all. I think most people realize that a) old things might have regressive content, and b) people reprinting it aren't necessarily endorsing it.

But even though I assume B, in my opinion it's nice when the publishers clarify, so that if it's especially regressive I don't have to wonder who I'm giving my money to.

And if I don't care I can skip the forward.

Yeah, in the video interviews Tondo made it very explicit that they wanted to clarify that they were reprinting all this stuff for historical value, when by their inter al policies there are parts they could not put in a book in 2024.

 

[mamba]

I don't think this is what I do at all.

of course you don’t, yet you have been doing nothing but this and expressing it in various ways

 

[Bedrockgames]

A lot of that is context, reliant on people knowing that you don't agree with such views in the first place and the nuance of why you would want to repost such a thing, which might require knowledge of what is going on at any given time. But you're an individual, not a massive corporation with incredible reach. Clarity is paramount, which is why you avoid being put into such muddied situations.

Again though, they are not retweeting. They are putting out material that they own the rights to which people want to see. I don't think people are assuming they endorse every line of text (the reason they are putting it out there isn't because they think it has regressive language that they want to promote: surely people aren't going to reach this conclusion)

Again, we have people complaining about this being noted: if you don't have a problem with the fact that they say it is bad, then that part of the text is not for you. The people who are "outraged" are people who disagree with the statement, not that it is there. Not all of a foreword will be useful to everyone; that doesn't mean we should complain, since there are other people who might not be familiar with the relevant context. So unless you actually disagree with the statement rather than its presence, I suggest you just ignore it and not clutch pearls for people who legitimately disagree with it.

Again the problem is they are putting this out there with a lot of sweeping statements about the content, without getting into specifics, and doing so on topics fans are still hotly debating (and they are the company who presently publish D&D so it is relevant). Again, it is what I expect from academic language now. I think it would have been better handled in another venue, and I think there is a more nuanced and thorough way to explore that topic (i.e. I think they invoke some lazy narratives and make some straw man cases, rather than look at some of the alternative viewpoints and take those seriously as well). If they want to address this stuff without further dividing the fanbase or creating hostility among the fanbase, an easy solution is expose the concern in a more even handed way

 

[Remathilis]

Personally I think this is the better option. A foreword isn’t a good place to try to explore this topic and I do think it being put out by WOTC and being a celebration makes it not the greatest venue. I also don’t see that as a tacit endorsement at all. I see it more as them from refraining from weighing in on ongoing debates in the hobby. Now they have effectively picked a side and that is going to lead to greater splintering in the hobby

Like I said earlier, it is fairly milk toast academic reasoning. I don’t find it shocking and I think the appropriate response now is to allow for a conversation. But it is a topic that could have been better handled by a non-WOTC publisher, hopefully taking a broader range of viewpoints on perspectives

Silence is still a political choice. I'm sure there is a famous poem where the line "and I did not speak out" is repeated several times. WotC would be viewed as endorsing those viewpoints by not addressing them. "New WotC book reprints sexist content" would have been all over the news sites. We'd STILL be arguing if Gary's words were sexist. The only difference is that WotC would be attacked by the other side in the debate rather than by the grifters.

 

[Bedrockgames]

of course you don’t, yet you have been doing nothing but this and expressing it in various ways

All I can say is I would urge you to consider the possibly that you are wrong about me

 

[Bedrockgames]

Silence is still a political choice. I'm sure there is a famous poem where the line "and I did not speak out" is repeated several times. WotC would be viewed as endorsing those viewpoints by not addressing them. "New WotC book reprints sexist content" would have been all over the news sites. We'd STILL be arguing if Gary's words were sexist. The only difference is that WotC would be attacked by the other side in the debate rather than by the grifters.

Okay but that poem is about the holocaust. We are talking about a book that comments on potentially sexist language in a book. These things are miles apart. No one is accusing Gary of genocide

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

Silence is still a political choice.

Qui tacet something videtur, not that it saved Thomas More.