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.

 

[polyhedral man]

I think it important to note, again - They don't call him any such thing in the intro.

The section that has raised the dust-up doesn't even use his name! It says that there is problematic material, and gives a few examples of the issues. At one point is says that one bit of misogyny is "intentional", but doesn't call anyone anything for that.

Spoiler: the passage in question

View attachment 387307

I mean if I said you did something reprehensible deliberately, then it does sound like I'm accusing you of it. I don't see a difference. The same meaning is implied, the fact that they're using passive voice doesn't change the meaning.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think Gygax could often be sexist, and it's ok to criticise him for it. Heck I remember teasing him about his stupid Harlot Table here on ENW, back in the day (he took it in good spirit). I don't think it's ok to have the kind of attacks on Gygax and co that appeared in the foreword of a book purportedly celebrating D&D.

On cultural norms, I do think the 1970s was an amazingly sexist decade. A lot of the stuff produced then looked weird even in the mid 1980s. That's much less true of earlier eras eg the 1930s-1940s.

So, you agree with the foreword that there are things published in the 70's that were racist, sexist, and generally crappy. But you don't think it is okay to point that out?

But you just pointed it out. So, why are you S'mon engaging in such vicious attacks on Gary Gygax's character?

And if you don't think anything you said was an attack on Gygax, then why is a foreword that says the exact same things and never calls Gygax anything an attack?

 

[Remathilis]

I mean if I said you did something reprehensible deliberately, then it does sound like I'm accusing you of it. I don't see a difference. The same meaning is implied, the fact that they're using passive voice doesn't change the meaning.

Or, as I'm learning in this thread, maybe it has less to do with one man's beliefs and more to do with the corporate culture of the company which produced them? A much more "all are punished" take rather than a single scapegoat.

 

[Umbran]

The reason the dialog uses remain interesting is precisely thst Socrates-the-charachter neither knows the answers...

It is fiction. Scorates-the-character is depicted as not knowing. But the author does know, and arranges both question and answer to suit the ends they want.

It is like saying that a comic book "proves" that Spider-Man can beat the Hulk. The depiction is not a simulation. It turns out exactly as the authors want, no matter what.

That said, this is a tangent, and I'm going to limit it from here on.

 

[S'mon]

I'm starting to think that the references to sexism in content but not naming Gary by name has less to do with Defending Gary and more to do with sexism being a common belief in Lake Geneva...

Reading up on the Jean Wells Palace of the Silver Princess affair, and some TSR alumni still attacking her even today, I kinda got the impression that E Gary Gygax was about the least sexist man in Lake Geneva!

 

[polyhedral man]

Or, as I'm learning in this thread, maybe it has less to do with one man's beliefs and more to do with the corporate culture of the company which produced them? A much more "all are punished" take rather than a single scapegoat.

At some point we have to examine the motive and the moral authority of the current publisher: who apparently feels they can pass judgement (without having bothered to even interview the people that were present at the time, according to Kuntz).

"Let those who are without sin cast the first fireball" :>

 

[Remathilis]

Reading up on the Jean Wells Palace of the Silver Princess affair, and some TSR alumni still attacking her even today, I kinda got the impression that E Gary Gygax was about the least sexist man in Lake Geneva!

I don't know if you can measure it like it's the temperature, but I begin to think that the old boys club brought out the worst in each other...

 

[Justice and Rule]

Like I said, it is milk toast academic criticism of media. I think it gets some of the stuff wrong, I think there are better ways to handle it, but I wouldn’t reduce criticisms I have of the foreword as insulting Gygax (I can understand though how fans might read it that way, how his colleagues might read it that way). On Gary Gygax and sexism, I feel like I have been very clear in providing my assessment

This is such a bad line of criticism from your side: if it's a milquetoast academic critique, then why are you so strenuously opposed to it? I would understand that from my side of things, where I would want them to be more clear and firm on what what's problematic and why it's bad. But from your side, where you would rather remove it, the idea that this is a feeble critique is nonsense: you're already talking about how it is taking up a topic on a heated issue!

Like, you can't critique something by calling it milquetoast and then wanting to make a product even more milquetoast by removing any sort of critique/recognition of problematic content. It just doesn't track.

 

[S'mon]

So, you agree with the foreword that there are things published in the 70's that were racist, sexist, and generally crappy. But you don't think it is okay to point that out?

But you just pointed it out. So, why are you S'mon engaging in such vicious attacks on Gary Gygax's character?

And if you don't think anything you said was an attack on Gygax, then why is a foreword that says the exact same things and never calls Gygax anything an attack?

Because of context - like I said, there is a time & place for everything.

Still if the foreword had
(a) only called him sexist, not misogynist and
(b) not accused him of normalising slavery and wanting players to kill Vishnu,
then I probably wouldn't really have that much of a problem with it. Maybe I'd still have rolled my eyes a bit at the ignorance of "Tiamat being female = sexism". But I'd certainly think Grummz & co were over reacting and (naughty word) stirring.

 

[Gradine]

So, you agree with the foreword that there are things published in the 70's that were racist, sexist, and generally crappy. But you don't think it is okay to point that out?

Again, I am asking people to entertain the possibility that the biggest reason why people are objecting to these callouts is that they don't think there was anything wrong them.. It falls directly in line with their own beliefs.

That is plainly true for grifters like Grummz and Musk; how willing one is to stating it outright falls along similar lines as whether one identified as a Sad Puppy or an Angry Puppy, but this has always been a distinction without a meaningful difference.