[BoVD]Well, since I can't seem to post this on Wizards forums...

[herald]

Jeff, you might want to read Gary Gygax's posts on Lenard's contributions to the Greyhawk Campaign here.

So, I just backed my self up!


And as far as Greenwood, he had a campaign world almost as old as Gary's even though it was unpublished. Ed's articals in Dragon predate Hickman's work.

So jeff, maybe you should do some homework....


Ring bell, school is in.

 

[SemperJase]

LOL!

Does that mean me? I didn't even start this thread.

So instead of engaging my ideas, you infer that I have some type of ego problem.

Its clear that you do not know my motivation. The real reason for my posts is to encourage improvements in gaming.


I also like exchanging ideas with other people. Isn't that the whole purpose of a message board?

 

[JeffB]

Ding Ding...

Read my post...you said OD&D...I said neither had any OD&D products published with them as an author...correct?

Len's first PUBLISHED product was L1...Tracy's was I3....about a year apart.

I wasn't talking about contributions..I was talking about products they authored.

Ed was one of hundreds of D&D players who made a campaign setting...just like Tracy did w/ DL,and Len did the Lendore Isles thing which got tacked on to GH. Ed didn't get a D&D product out til 1987.

My facts, as I stated them are correct.

 

[JeffB]

Does that mean me? I didn't even start this thread.

So instead of engaging my ideas, you infer that I have some type of ego problem.

Its clear that you do not know my motivation. The real reason for my posts is to encourage improvements in gaming.


I also like exchanging ideas with other people. Isn't that the whole purpose of a message board?

He's talking about the original poster who has not been around since he started the thread.

 

[SemperJase]

He's talking about the original poster who has not been around since he started the thread.

I still think the ideas are worthy to discuss. For me it is interesting conversation.

The fact that the original poster hasn't made a reply could just indicate that he has a real job

I can't say I recognize his name as a troller here and I thought it was a thoughtful post.

 

[RobNJ]

Is this really something that has been in demand? How does WotC know?

I believe Monte was referring to the arch-fiend statistics more than anything else, though I can guarantee you that there is an audience for mature content.

I can offer only anecdotal evidence, but I have been involved with well over 100 gamers in my campaigns over the last 18 or so years. Not one of them has ever said, "you know, I wish there was viler stuff in D&D like there is in (insert book or system here). Wouldn't that be great?" I know I have never even had that thought BEGIN to cross my mind.

That really adds nothing to the discussion, though. I can say (truthfully) that I sent the announcement about the upcoming book to friends and one of them, who previously saw nothing of value in D&D openly considered getting into the game because of this book.

Even amongst those who support the inclusion of the material in Dragon #300, I would ask, "did any of you say to yourselves, 'gee, viler material would really make D&D so much better' prior to the BoVD and Dragon 300?"

Absolutely. I prefer a more adult game.

Please leave aside the question of whether "printing Vile content" is morally right or wrong in and of itself. My question is, "was printing Vile content in Dragon Magazine appropriate?" (Note: not right/wrong, but "appropriate")

Yes. The magazine is consumed mostly by adults, there were warnings for months beforehand, and the material inside wasn't even that bad.

 

[Theuderic]

LOL ( that is what I was talking about Jeff and yes I am laughing even harder now! LOL ) Hey Jeff I think I know you from Dragonsfoot. Over there, my name is Ermanaric.

 

[herald]

Ding ding..

You're out of context.

I was talking about people who shaped the game. If you can prove otherwise then do so. for that matter, go back and reread my post so you can atleast understand what I'm talking about.

I don't care when thier publishing dates are.

You are correct. L1 was released in 1981 and Ravenloft was released in 1983.

Be before that Lakofka was published in articals in Dragon Magazine as an expert on D&D rules. His advice was helpful and inciteful and I remember using it in many of the games I ran.

You can discount Greenwood's and Lakofka contributions in Dragon Magazine all you want. But it thier repeated and consistant work helped create an interest in the game that Is without a doubt more significat than Hickman's.

 

[The Sigil]

I believe Monte was referring to the arch-fiend statistics more than anything else, though I can guarantee you that there is an audience for mature content.

I'll back you in that there HAS been a very noticeable demand for arch-fiend statistics. I wonder though, what the size of the audience that desires "mature content" (different than the audience FOR mature content) is compated to the size of the audience that does not desire "mature content" (which probably does overlap the audience FOR mature content).

I consider myself in the audience for mature content (i.e., the audience that can handle seeing it), but strongly prefers not to use it.

That really adds nothing to the discussion, though. I can say (truthfully) that I sent the announcement about the upcoming book to friends and one of them, who previously saw nothing of value in D&D openly considered getting into the game because of this book.

Interesting. At least now I have some anecdotal evidence of someone who DID want to see more mature stuff in D&D. It's about as useful as my evidence of those who don't, I suppose, but it is useful to know that there are those out there who wanted it (my personal tastes notwithstanding).

Absolutely. I prefer a more adult game.

"More adult" - I won't take too much umbrage because I'm sure no offense was intended, but I think the correct term is "more vile." Or perhaps you meant "of a sexual nature" - I'm not sure. If you are using "adult" as a synonym for "mature," well, IMO there is nothing "immature" about a conscious choice to exclude vile content, just as there is nothing inherently "immature" about the choice to include it.

Yes. The magazine is consumed mostly by adults, there were warnings for months beforehand, and the material inside wasn't even that bad.

Fair enough. You certainly have the right to your opinion and have presented it in an amicable and reasonable manner. I may disagree with it (do you feel that if Time gave sufficient warning, it would be appropriate for it to drop a Playboy spread into it just because it is read mostly by adults?), but hey, that's what these forums are for, right? If we all agreed on everything these would be really boring forums.

--The Sigil

 

[JeffB]

Ding ding..

You're out of context.

I was talking about people who shaped the game. If you can prove otherwise then do so. for that matter, go back and reread my post so you can atleast understand what I'm talking about.

I don't care when thier publishing dates are.

You are correct. L1 was released in 1981 and Ravenloft was released in 1983.

Be before that Lakofka was published in articals in Dragon Magazine as an expert on D&D rules. His advice was helpful and inciteful and I remember using it in many of the games I ran.

You can discount Greenwood's and Lakofka contributions in Dragon Magazine all you want. But it thier repeated and consistant work helped create an interest in the game that Is without a doubt more significat than Hickman's.

I do not discount anyone's work except in how you were making your argument.You said OD&D..Apparently you meant AD&D...which is entirely different. If I'm out of context it's because you "mis-spoke"

In addition I am not speaking of Ravenloft which uses the designation of I6. I specified I3..which is the first in the Desert of Desolation series.. which was Hickman's first module.

Perhaps we should get back to the point of the thread though.