D&D General Dave Arneson: Is He Underrated, or Overrated?

[Garthanos]

Viola Spolin absolutely created and ran what were recognizably role-playing games in the 1920s onwards. They were designed as theater exercises, but they are unmistakably games in that they can be won or lost and their main mode of play is role-playing and improvisation. There were no dice involved, and they never gained much currency outside the theater community, but we would absolutely recognize them as role-playing games.

I am sure that Gygax and Arneson were unfamiliar with her, and arrived at their games without knowledge of her games, but it's an example of exactly the kind of parallel evolution you're talking about. She was hugely influential, and basically what's now Second City, with all of its alumni and devotees, would not have existed without her.

This and other things are why TSR very got patents on roleplaying... it was just a concept which was in very near forms existing historically...

 

[Alzrius]

Viola Spolin absolutely created and ran what were recognizably role-playing games in the 1920s onwards. They were designed as theater exercises, but they are unmistakably games in that they can be won or lost and their main mode of play is role-playing and improvisation.

Based on some admittedly casual research, I don't think you can compare Spolin's games to what we mean when we refer to role-playing games (i.e. TTRPGs) today. There's no continuity of characters over multiple sessions, no increases in personal ability or acquisition of resources that make a character more powerful or competent, and no use of a referee or judge.

It might be a form of proto-LARPing, and maybe can be compared to Braunstein, but it's hard to call this "recognizably role-playing games" in the vein of D&D.

 

[Burnside]

Based on some admittedly casual research, I don't think you can compare Spolin's games to what we mean when we refer to role-playing games (i.e. TTRPGs) today. There's no continuity of characters over multiple sessions, no increases in personal ability or acquisition of resources that make a character more powerful or competent, and no use of a referee or judge.

It might be a form of proto-LARPing, and maybe can be compared to Braunstein, but it's hard to call this "recognizably role-playing games" in the vein of D&D.

I've trained with Viola Spolin's theater games quite a bit. I definitely am not implying that they are "in the vein of D&D" in terms of continuity of characters for multiple sessions or "leveling up".

Some of them do indeed use referees or judges, though.

And they are certainly role-playing games in the sense that they fit the definition of games and the mode of play is role-playing - they aren't just "acting" because there are rules by which they can be won or lost, and there is no set script. You pretend to be another character and in that role you are following the rules of the game in order to win it. A lot of the reason actors very easily pick up the non-mechanical aspects of D&D is because so much of their training is not dissimilarly structured.

There is a lot conceptually in common with D&D, but you've hit upon the two elements D&D really pioneered (leveling up, and continuing the same character's adventures in an episodic fashion for multiple sessions).

If you've ever seen an episode of Whose Line Is It Anyway, you've seen some of Viola Spolin's games in play.

 

[Alzrius]

I've trained with Viola Spolin's theater games quite a bit. I definitely am not implying that they are "in the vein of D&D" in terms of continuity of characters for multiple sessions or "leveling up".

Some of them do indeed use referees or judges, though.

Just out of curiosity, what do the referees/judges do? More specifically, do they arbitrate (or introduce/oversee a system of arbitration intended to resolve) conflicts between characters?

 

[Burnside]

Just out of curiosity, what do the referees/judges do? More specifically, do they arbitrate (or introduce/oversee a system of arbitration intended to resolve) conflicts between characters?

They introduce scenarios - or alter ongoing scenarios - in a way that players must react and respond to. They enforce rules or make rulings when a point is in dispute. Due to the nature of the game, judges/narrators are more likely to do stuff that CREATES conflict between characters rather than resolves it, though. Some of the games are cooperative, like D&D, but in some the players are competing against each other or to eliminate each other.

 

[Alzrius]

They introduce scenarios - or alter ongoing scenarios - in a way that players must react and respond to. They enforce rules or make rulings when a point is in dispute. Due to the nature of the game, judges/narrators are more likely to do stuff that CREATES conflict between characters rather than resolves it, though. Some of the games are cooperative, like D&D, but in some the players are competing against each other or to eliminate each other.

Given that, I suspect that we're running into an issue of semantics with regards to "games where the mode of play is role-playing" and "role-playing games." If the latter is D&D, and the former is a Spolin game, then there's clearly a greater area of differentiation than those two descriptions are necessarily making clear.

Of course, this gets back into questions of "what is a role-playing game?" which is basically Jon Peterson's The Elusive Shift all over again.

 

[Clint_L]

I loved Game Wizards, and similarly came away with a different opinion of Arneson (not to mention Gygax and Lorraine Williams).

Overrated is difficult to assess without context, but I do think Arneson generally gets more credit than he deserves. He definitely was the first Dungeon Master and came up with key ideas, like levelling. On the other hand, he did so as part of a gaming group that was sort of collectively building towards such concepts, and he was not the first in that group to act as a sort of DM-like referee for war gaming, if not specifically a fantasy dungeon crawl.

Nevertheless, it is indisputable that Arneson got the thing working that Gygax was able to turn into D&D, and so no Arneson, no D&D. However, after that his contributions diminish rapidly, and while he typically blamed others, especially Gygax, for this, in reading the actual records it is pretty clear that Arneson had trouble actually producing material. And not just for TSR - he had contract after contract in which he basically failed to deliver what he promised as far as actual work.

Ultimately, he comes off as a great ideas guy who wasn't very good when it became time to produce.

 

[jolt]

Many of the games initial ideas came from Arneson, but he was otherwise barely involved at all. He did none of the writing and fronted none of the money for production. I'm glad he ended up getting the money for the ideas that were his, but he was completely absent from everything that would end up making the game so successful.

 

[Blackmoor_Film]

Of the 6 people who were in the room when Arneson demonstrated Blackmoor in Lake Geneva all of them seem to think they were seeing something very novel.

Gary Gygax was taken with the concept immediately and tried to copy it with Rob Kuntz the next day unsuccessfully.

Rob Kuntz describes how Arneson did not have to have a written set of rules to demonstrate his concept because he had a functioning prototype.

Megarry already had been playing and he based his Dungeon! board game on his experiences in Arneson's game.

 

[Beek Gwenders]

I’ve read the book and also watched the Secrets of Blackmoor, read the Blackmoor Supplement from 1977, and generally was looking to understand the legend that is Dave Arneson. I was underwhelmed. I came away with the impression that ego played a huge role in Arnesons decision making. He didn’t produce much and didn’t have the insight to realize the value of D and D. He seemed to be pushing other projects that would ultimately fail. When brought back to TSR he was involved in a few Blackmoor oriented modules that, to put it nicely, were not good. Anyway, great idea that others developed and perfected (my opinion, first edition Ad&d). Peace