D&D General Evidence from the Arneson vs Gygax court case, including early draft of D&D with notes

[Alzrius]

More random thoughts as I read through this:

• The use of "anti-" as a prefix for enemy (demi)human fighters that the PCs will encounter in dungeons is notable. There will be anti-swordsmen, anti-myrmidons, anti-superheroes, anti-lords etc. Strangely, fighters are the only class listed like this (and we won't see it in the published version); wizards that the party encounters are just "wizards," and the "evil high priest" is still there as-is.
• There's a hand-written (or rather, hand-corrected, apparently for a misspelling) entry for "zitidars" on page 36 of the PDF. Now that's a Baroomism that I wasn't aware had ever been in D&D before! Thoats, yes, but not zitidars!
• The rate for recovering from wounds is 2 points per day. That's a lot faster than what the published OD&D had, where you regain no hit points the first day of rest, and then 1 hit point every other day of resting thereafter! (Of course, hit points seem to be different in this too, if I'm reading it right.)
• In the section on baronies, there are eighteen examples of possible investment listed, compared to fifteen in the published OD&D (at least, according to the version I'm checking). The three that were removed are "Education," "Magical Research," and "Slave Dealing."
• The "Angry Villager Rule" is still here, but it's much more explicit in its heavy-handedness than what we saw in the published version. This one flat-out says that the angry villagers will be faster than the PCs, fight better than them, and have "overwhealming [sic] numbers" to bring the PCs into line.
• Now this is notable: magic-user spells top out at 5th level spells! The entirety of the 6th-level spells found in OD&D (reincarnation, death spell, disintegrate, etc.) simply aren't here. (EDIT: so, it looks like move earth is here, albeit as a 5th level spell.)
• Interestingly, the cleric spell list is mostly the same as it is in the published version...until you get to 4th- and 5th-level spells. Notwithstanding how protection from evil isn't on the 1st-level spell list, everything here is the same as it is in OD&D, except that the 4th-level spells are missing turn sticks to snakes, speak with plants, and create water, whereas the 5th-level spells list doesn't have quest, insect plague, or create food.
• Strangely, this version of charm person is actually less powerful than what's in the published game, as here it only lasts for "a length of time equal to 6 + the level of the Magic_User [sic]" (presumably that means six turns), whereas the published version lasted until it was dispelled (citing dispel magic).

 

[Alzrius]

More interesting tidbits, specifically about how certain spells changed:

• Hold portal notes that the duration "2 dice" plus one per level of the magic-user above 1st; so a 2nd-level magic-user will hold the portal for 2d6+1 (presumably turns, again). While the clause about how powerful creatures can break a door down is still here, there's an interesting note that a magical creatures and magic-users subtract their level from the duration of the spell when trying to open a held portal, e.g. an 11th-level magic-user would subtract 11 (turns) from the duration of someone else's hold portal. Presumably (it doesn't specify) if they exceed the duration, they treat the portal as if it were no longer held.
• The read magic and read languages spells from the published OD&D are a single spell here: read magic or languages.
• Apparently, the knock spell hadn't been invented yet, as it's not here. I suppose that explains the oddness about bypassing hold portal.
• It wasn't the only one, either: there are only nine 3rd-level wizard spells here, rather than the fourteen we'd eventually see. Not invented yet are infravision, slow spell, haste spell, protection from normal missiles, and water breathing.
• What the deuce?! A wizard of 11th level or higher who casts animate dead can potentially bring the corpse back to life! This requires rolling 2d100, where if the second roll is higher than the first, the attempt to bring the dead person back to life fails, and the remains are atomized.
• Apparently, magic jar originally only required a saving throw when used against persons (this is underlined in the draft text) of 7th level or higher; in published OD&D, anyone would get a save against it.
• Okay, this is weird...there's a single page with a header titled "Spells Above the Usual." It lists three spells: reincarnaton, stone to flesh and invisable stalker [sic]. The first is noted as operating like animate dead's ability to raise the dead. The second says that it's reversible (possibly the first instance of an explicitly reversible spell?) and that it can only be learned by wizards of 11th level or higher. The last one is like the spell we'd eventually see, but that it can only be learned by a wizard of 13th level or higher, and that it must be "recorded" when it's cast; apparently, in addition to defeating the invisible stalker in combat, you can also end the spell by finding and destroying the record of the spell. I feel like this last part is referencing some pulp story that I'm overlooking...
• In published OD&D, there's a special clause in the commune spell where once per year a special communing is allowed where double the number of questions can be asked. Here, it's four times per year, and it just says you can ask more than one question on such days.

 

[Alzrius]

Skipping around a bit, it looks like there's a scan of the published OD&D set beginning on page 852. However, not only are the booklets listed out of order, but the pages within each appear to be scrambled as well; it's almost like they removed the staples and scanned each sheet of paper individually, resulting in a confusing mess. It's all readable, but it's not easy to navigate.

Looking at the OD&D page on The Acaeum, this set doesn't seem to be the first printing. Based on the image on the cover of the Men & Magic booklet, the lack of a price on the booklet covers, and the fact that Tolkien references are still present in the text, this looks to be a copy of the fifth printing.

For those interested, the balrog's statistics appear in the table on page 856, and the creature's description (including its special powers and combat abilities) are on page 867.

EDIT: And apparently balrogs are a kind of dragon? Or at least, that's where they're listed in the scan of the published OD&D booklets. See page 912 (the very last page of the entire thing) in the upper-right corner; they're listed as entry #10 under the "Dragon Types" category of monsters that players can randomly encounter in the wilderness.

 

[Casimir Liber]

Based on the illustration of the mostly-naked warrior, I would guess that the class was not meant to be male-specific.

And would go with how the suffix "-man" was used up until about 20 years ago as nonspecific...how "fireman" "postman" were not necessarily meaning "men"...and "mankind" etc. Hence I agree that "fighting man" (which I do remember being used in the late 1970s) was not implicitly gender-specific at the time (or at least that's how we viewed it)

 

[robertsconley]

Basically, Arneson invented D&D. However, the form in which it was published is mainly Gygaxs version of it.

No Arneson rules were known to be different than what Gygax wrote up. It more accurate to say that Arneson invented tabletop roleplaying starting with running a campaign based on a fantasy Braunstein, Blackmoor. Then taught Gygax who in turned wrote Dungeons & Dragons, and ran the Greyhawk campaign to playtest it. Gygax passed drafts and questions back to Dave who then edited and made comments. Finally the last manuscript was made, typeset, and published as OD&D.

 

[Yaarel]

No Arneson rules were known to be different than what Gygax wrote up. It more accurate to say that Arneson invented tabletop roleplaying starting with running a campaign based on a fantasy Braunstein, Blackmoor. Then taught Gygax who in turned wrote Dungeons & Dragons, and ran the Greyhawk campaign to playtest it. Gygax passed drafts and questions back to Dave who then edited and made comments. Finally the last manuscript was made, typeset, and published as OD&D.

We see from the notes by Arneson, what the rules for his game look like. His rules are D&D. Arneson invented D&D.

The D&D of Arneson has five ability scores (Intelligence, Cunning, Strength, Health, Appearance), the same abilities that the early draft of D&D uses. And so on with the other fundamental rules of D&D that Arneson invented.

It is more like Gygax created a new setting for the D&D game that Arneson invented. The setting also added setting-specific mechanics for its species, such as level limits. Eventually D&D adds Dexterity as a "variant ability", like one today might add Honor or Athletics to the list of abilities. Gygax will also recharacterize Cunning as Wisdom, and Appearance as Charisma, but then later also add Appearance separately as Comeliness.

The game engine and its revolutionary paradigm shift to roleplaying are what Arneson innovates.

 

[Alzrius]

We see from the notes by Arneson, what the rules for his game look like. His rules are D&D. Arneson invented D&D.

Can you be more specific about this? What notes on what pages?

The D&D of Arneson has five ability scores (Intelligence, Cunning, Strength, Health, Appearance), the same abilities that the early draft of D&D uses. And so on with the other fundamental rules of D&D that Arneson invented.

I see those in the July 1st, 1973 draft that Gygax made. What documents by Arneson do they appear in?

 

[Yaarel]

Can you be more specific about this? What notes on what pages?

I see those in the July 1st, 1973 draft that Gygax made. What documents by Arneson do they appear in?

The notes (at PDF pages 11-21) are Arneson outlining the game that he is playing. The outline is for the publication of the D&D game.

The draft of the D&D game (22ff), that Gygax types up, which is credited to both Gygax and Arneson, shows how much the D&D game incorporates and is dependent on the game by Arneson.

 

[Alzrius]

The notes (at PDF pages 11-21) are Arneson outlining the game that he is playing. The outline is for the publication of the D&D game.

Okay, this is where I'm having some trouble, because I can't find any confirmation that these are Arneson's notes, rather than something Gygax drew up before typing the manuscript. There's no name or signature on any of those pages that I can see from a quick scan, and the court's labeling them as the defendant's exhibit seems to indicate that they were things Gygax submitted into evidence (which, as I noted before, makes me think they're his).

 

[Yaarel]

Okay, this is where I'm having some trouble, because I can't find any confirmation that these are Arneson's notes, rather than something Gygax drew up before typing the manuscript. There's no name or signature on any of those pages that I can see from a quick scan, and the court's labeling them as the defendant's exhibit seems to indicate that they were things Gygax submitted into evidence (which, as I noted before, makes me think they're his).

Consider PDF 15.

"Introduction: This is where Gary [Gygax] editorializes and tells neat stories as much as his little heart desires and if he wants to uses extra pages. A rule book is a rule book, not a novel."

This is a reminder by Arneson, for Gygax to keep the rule book terse, tight, and clear.


The fact that the draft of D&D is so similar to the outline notes by Arneson is why Arneson won the legal case.