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.

 

[Remathilis]

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" :>

WotC is only advising that the work they present does not reflect their modern views and the material represents intentional design rather than simple ignorance. It's not a trial, it's an acknowledgement that the Women's lib joke was not born of ignorance and is not tolerated today.

 

[Azzy]

Yes. I basically agree with Prof DM/Dungeoncraft's take, or Gygax's daughter's take. I always thought Gygax came across a bit sexist in some of his writings. That doesn't make it appropriate to call him a sexist (& several other things) in the intro to a celebration book. It's not a burn in hell offence. It's not even as bad as the OGL fiasco or the Pinkertons.

So, we shouldn't call sexists people sexist? We shouldn't acknowledge facts?

 

[Bedrockgames]

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

Apologies for my spelling. Because I think a lot of milquetoast academic criticism, especially around language in media, is flawed. But I don’t think my opposition is all that strenuous

 

[Justice and Rule]

So, we shouldn't call sexists people sexist? We shouldn't acknowledge facts?

We're at a point where obviously everyone understands that certain views and ideas are wrong, but we can't say that in public because it's hotly-debated and I dunno, maybe the other guys had even worse views?!

 

[S'mon]

So, we shouldn't call sexists people sexist? We shouldn't acknowledge facts?

I'm calling him sexist here. It's ok to discuss it. Not sure I'd call it a "fact", it's an opinion, which I hold. I wouldn't put it in the introduction to a book sold as a celebration of D&D. But I think it's fine to discuss it in a different context.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Apologies for my spelling. Because I think a lot of milquetoast academic criticism, especially around language in media, is flawed.

I don't really care about the spelling (I followed your spelling last time), but I don't get that because it's milquetoast, we should make it even weaker. If anything, we should make fewer compromises and be stronger in our critique, which is the exact opposite of what you've been arguing so far.

But I don’t think my opposition is all that strenuous

Uh, have you looked at your posts? You can say that, but given how much you've objected, it's hard to believe that it's not strenuous.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm calling him sexist here. It's ok to discuss it. Not sure I'd call it a "fact", it's an opinion, which I hold. I wouldn't put it in the introduction to a book sold as a celebration of D&D. But I think it's fine to discuss it in a different context.

Where WOULD the better place to put such criticisms be? Name the venue.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I'm calling him sexist here. It's ok to discuss it. Not sure I'd call it a "fact", it's an opinion, which I hold. I wouldn't put it in the introduction to a book sold as a celebration of D&D. But I think it's fine to discuss it in a different context.

Just because you are celebrating something doesn't mean you gotta whitewash it, especially if your "celebration" is a look at the past.

 

[polyhedral man]

WotC is only advising that the work they present does not reflect their modern views and the material represents intentional design rather than simple ignorance. It's not a trial, it's an acknowledgement that the Women's lib joke was not born of ignorance and is not tolerated today.

Approximately 80% of communication is non-verbal. If it's not that, it's something close. What makes us so certain it isn't a joke or a tongue -in-cheek comment? What gives WotC the right to make the ultimate decision on the intent? A lot of people in the comments section seem to think "if I think so, then that's wrong". Well no, it's not quite that simple. We've all had the experience of being misinterpreted.

A lot of people will not be satisfied by what I'm saying here. They will say, yes, but he also did this. And he also did that.

Well, he also inspired Kelsey Dionne to pursue her passion. So I take judgments of the man's character with more than a grain of salt. Especially when that judgement is made by a risk-averse corporation that is certainly not saintly.

 

[Sacrosanct]

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...

David C Sutherland was the worst. By a mile. Tim Kask had confirmed a couple times about how he actively hated women, was resentful of all the "new" artists (post 1979) that were way more skilled than him, and posited it was one of life's great mysteries how he ever found a woman to marry him.