Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="darjr" data-source="post: 8819518" data-attributes="member: 52905">The release of the PHB seems to me to mark a profound jump in the slickness and quality of the physical product from TSR. I would love to know more of the details in how that came about. I wonder if Alex knows? This is one of his copies, formerly owned by Kevin Blume![callout]Let's turn the calendar to the year 1978 on our TSR/D&amp;D tour. Up today is a big one. This was my first ever D&amp;D purchase. I did not by my copy (an 8th printing) until 1982. Depicted is a lovely 1st print, my 8th, and Kevin Blume's personal copy (look to the upper left).[/callout][ATTACH=full]265862[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]265863[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]265864[/ATTACH]<a href="https://twitter.com/GHC_and_Tacos/status/1500904971201568769?s=20&amp;t=c4RVJRKqp6_5eQaqHmXNTw" target="_blank">link</a>The D&amp;D historian has a bit that I think is relevant now and will probably forever be.[callout]What a Difference an Edition Makes: The Controversy. There's a lot of disagreement over whether AD&amp;D is a minor revision of OD&amp;D — gathering together all of its supplements and articles — or whether it's something bigger. This controversy started in Dragon #26 (June 1979) when Gygax rather shockingly said, &quot;there is no similarity (perhaps even less) between D&amp;D and AD&amp;D than there is between D&amp;D and its various imitators produced by competing publishers.&quot; In other words, he was claiming that OD&amp;D was more like Tunnels &amp; Trolls (1975) and RuneQuest (1978) than AD&amp;D! He was very clear in saying this: &quot; It is neither an expansion nor a revision of the old game, it is a new game.&quot;Some folks disagreed, most notably Richard Berg who reviewed the Players Handbook in Strategy &amp; Tactics magazine and said that it was a rewrite of the OD&amp;D game. Gygax took extreme umbrage of this claim in Dragon #22 (February 1979), stating:&quot;Under the circumstances, one can only wonder why Mr. Berg took the time to write on a subject of which he obviously knew so little. Perhaps it is personal or professional jealousy, as the success of D&amp;D and now AD&amp;D has certainly set the rest of the gaming hobby industry on its collective ear, but that is speculation.&quot;The fans had the ultimate word: when you examine the RPG magazines of the late '70s and early '80s that most of them didn't differentiate much between OD&amp;D, AD&amp;D, and BD&amp;D. Instead, magazine articles were usually written for &quot;Dungeons &amp; Dragons&quot; generally. In the present day, most people would probably still agree that Berg was more correct than Gygax … but it all depends on what you're measuring.[/callout][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.dmsguild.com/product/17003/Players-Handbook-1e?affiliate_id=182934[/URL]Non-affiliate link[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.dmsguild.com/product/17003/Players-Handbook-1e[/URL]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="darjr, post: 8819518, member: 52905"] The release of the PHB seems to me to mark a profound jump in the slickness and quality of the physical product from TSR. I would love to know more of the details in how that came about. I wonder if Alex knows? This is one of his copies, formerly owned by Kevin Blume! [callout]Let's turn the calendar to the year 1978 on our TSR/D&D tour. Up today is a big one. This was my first ever D&D purchase. I did not by my copy (an 8th printing) until 1982. Depicted is a lovely 1st print, my 8th, and Kevin Blume's personal copy (look to the upper left).[/callout] [ATTACH type="full" alt="1667704838947.png"]265862[/ATTACH][ATTACH type="full" alt="1667704847667.png"]265863[/ATTACH][ATTACH type="full" alt="1667704856199.png"]265864[/ATTACH] [URL='https://twitter.com/GHC_and_Tacos/status/1500904971201568769?s=20&t=c4RVJRKqp6_5eQaqHmXNTw']link[/URL] The D&D historian has a bit that I think is relevant now and will probably forever be. [callout] [B][I]What a Difference an Edition Makes: The Controversy.[/I][/B] There's a lot of disagreement over whether AD&D is a minor revision of OD&D — gathering together all of its supplements and articles — or whether it's something bigger. This controversy started in [I]Dragon #26[/I] (June 1979) when Gygax rather shockingly said, "there is no similarity (perhaps even less) between D&D and AD&D than there is between D&D and its various imitators produced by competing publishers." In other words, he was claiming that OD&D was more like [I]Tunnels & Trolls[/I] (1975) and [I]RuneQuest[/I] (1978) than AD&D! He was very clear in saying this: " It is neither an expansion nor a revision of the old game, it is a new game." Some folks disagreed, most notably Richard Berg who reviewed the [I]Players Handbook[/I] in [I]Strategy & Tactics[/I] magazine and said that it was a rewrite of the OD&D game. Gygax took extreme umbrage of this claim in [I]Dragon #22[/I] (February 1979), stating: [I]"Under the circumstances, one can only wonder why Mr. Berg took the time to write on a subject of which he obviously knew so little. Perhaps it is personal or professional jealousy, as the success of D&D and now AD&D has certainly set the rest of the gaming hobby industry on its collective ear, but that is speculation."[/I] The fans had the ultimate word: when you examine the RPG magazines of the late '70s and early '80s that most of them didn't differentiate much between OD&D, AD&D, and BD&D. Instead, magazine articles were usually written for "Dungeons & Dragons" generally. In the present day, most people would probably still agree that Berg was more correct than Gygax … but it all depends on what you're measuring.[/callout] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.dmsguild.com/product/17003/Players-Handbook-1e?affiliate_id=182934[/URL] Non-affiliate link [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.dmsguild.com/product/17003/Players-Handbook-1e[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification