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

[Mannahnin]

The outline of rules by Arneson remain intact in the publication of D&D.

Where can I read that written outline of rules, dating prior to Feb 1973?

Related: I wish the Secrets of Blackmoor crew would do part 2.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

and Supplement II: Blackmoor (composed by Tim Kask from Dave Arneson's notes) much less so.

.... and even that, from what we've heard, is some kernels from Arnseon, and a lot of "in-fill" from Kask.

According to Tim Kask-

But where I really began to learn my craft was with Blackmoor, the second D&D supplement.

One day, after I had been there a couple of months, Gary and Brian were waiting for me that morning when I got to Gary’s house (we worked out of his basement) with what looked to be a bushel basket of scrap papers, like someone had cleaned out their desk, and sly smiles on their faces. I should have known something was up by those smiles…

Dropping the basket at my feet, they announced that it contained the next supplement and that I should pitch right in. After stirring it a bit, I asked if they were serious, and they assured me that they were. It took the better part of two days to sort it out, and another day or two to try to make some sense of it. When I reported back about a week later that what I had found was contradictory, confusing, incomplete, partially incomprehensible, lacking huge bits and pieces and mostly gibberish, they laughed and said they knew that. Both of them had already come to the same conclusion that if I was to be the editor, here was my acid test, and that neither one of them certainly wanted to do it. So over the next several weeks, I sorted, filled in, added and deleted. What came out was about 60% my work, 30% Dave Arneson's and the remainder came from Gary and Rob Kuntz. I was reminded by Gary that the day I brought the finished manuscript in to him and Brian that I threatened to quit if ever I was given another “project” (read “basket case”) such as this one.

 

[ilgatto]

Great overview. I also want to note that Gary's first draft based on Dave's notes (again going from recent memory as it was mentioned in the Jason Tondro interview about the new upcoming book) was around 50 pages. And that was expanded to around/over 100 in the collaboration phase where they were communicating back and forth. That includes Gygax omitting some of Arneson's rules and ideas, something Dave complained about later in writing, including in First Fantasy Campaign, as I recall.

Dungeons & Dragons is a game Gary produced, based off Dave's Blackmoor. Dave may deserve the title of inventor of RPGs (although stuff like Braunstein and Western Gunfight also contain most or all of the elements we think of today as needed for an RPG), but there is no "D&D" (even under another name) without Gary.

Seconded!

 

[overgeeked]

Agreed! Though, TBH, I’d love to see a current printing of the Blackmoor (DYAC) rules and setting as close to what the group still plays. In that documentary, they appeared to be having a blast, and must be, considering they’ve been playing it for over 50 years.

Bob Meyer text interview.

Here's a video of Bob Meyer talking about the history of Blackmoor and how he runs Blackmoor.

Again, if people want to argue about FKR, kindly take it elsewhere.

 

[Willie the Duck]

In terms of trying to say one person, or another person, is solely responsible for D&D, I think it is a fool's errand, and I will borrow the phrasing of someone more knowledgeable and leave it at this-

"...Gygax and Arneson were co-creators of D&D, in at least the crucial sense that Gygax would never have worked toward such a game without incorporation of Arneson's vision, and Arneson would never have realized the publication of such a game without the structure that Gygax provided it."

I would agree. Certainly once we start battling over more, less, or certainly what admixture. One person can provide very little, but that part was crucial. Records can indicate one person can be the one that hits pay dirt, but how much of the ground they excavated may be unknown. The amount left unknown is sufficient to broaden the error bars to be a huge portion of the total. Most importantly, collaborations are, well, collaborations. The people involved are working together, off each other, and with (or sometimes against, in spite of, or to spite) each other. The whole thing is a frustrating mess even if the whole process is recorded on film, or the like, much less the patchwork narrative we're left with from the primary sources.

It is telling, to me, that Supplement I: Greyhawk (by Gygax and Kuntz) contains a bunch of rules we're basically still using today in updated form, and Supplement II: Blackmoor (composed by Tim Kask from Dave Arneson's notes) much less so.

+ all other posts about Supplement II.

I don't see it that way. I think activities before publication of initial D&D and actions taken afterwards are separate data points. If Dave had chosen to pursue the rest of his history major and become a historian/teacher/whatnot or been hit by a falling meteor or otherwise left the industry completely after contributing what he had* to the original D&D game, that wouldn't retroactively take away from that initial contribution.
*which we can debate, but as I indicated above strong conclusions are IMO much harder.

I think it unflinchingly obvious that Dave's career at producing D&D -once it was D&D- was a clear failure to launch (with recent publications clarifying a lot it being Dave-action-generated). However, Dave's major contribution to the game took place before this fraught working arrangement was initiated. Gary simply went on to do more after that initial point, whereas Dave crashed and burned.

 

[Mannahnin]

I don't see it that way. I think activities before publication of initial D&D and actions taken afterwards are separate data points. If Dave had chosen to pursue the rest of his history major and become a historian/teacher/whatnot or been hit by a falling meteor or otherwise left the industry completely after contributing what he had* to the original D&D game, that wouldn't retroactively take away from that initial contribution.
*which we can debate, but as I indicated above strong conclusions are IMO much harder.

I think it unflinchingly obvious that Dave's career at producing D&D -once it was D&D- was a clear failure to launch (with recent publications clarifying a lot it being Dave-action-generated). However, Dave's major contribution to the game took place before this fraught working arrangement was initiated. Gary simply went on to do more after that initial point, whereas Dave crashed and burned.

I agree with all that. I also think that the relative lengths of the manuscript D&D drafts and the material Dave produced for Blackmoor are strongly indicative that prior to working with Gary he never had a game engine written that closely resembled D&D.

I'd love to see any of his written rules from prior to Feb 1973 that showed otherwise.

My recollection of reports from the Twin Cities crew is that his rules were highly variable and never fixed, and that after he got early drafts back from Gary they started testing those, but that they didn't resemble what he had been doing all that much.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

the craziest blast from the past in that linked thread in the OP was the 3rd or 4th post down that referenced MeWe! Helloooo 2019!

 

[Aldarron]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that those are Gygax's notes, not Arneson's. Notice how, in the bottom left, they're all tagged as "DEFT'S EXH" and a number? That looks a lot like "defendant's exhibit." And the date for each is 7-18-79, which means they're part of the infamous Arneson v. Gygax case, where Gygax was the defendant.

Now, strictly speaking, that just establishes that these are exhibits put forward by Gygax in the case...but I find it hard to believe that he'd be putting forward exhibits that establish Arneson as having been the creative mind behind various aspects of the game. Hence my presumption that these are Gygax's notes.

No the larger hand is Arneson's and the really squiggly one is Dave Megarry (Dungeon Boardgame) who was taking notes dictated by Arneson as he read through.

 

[Aldarron]

• "Fighter" is used interchangeably with "Fighting Men," (possibly?) disproving the idea that the class was ever supposed to be male-specific.

Never in my life have I heard this. What dunce would think only males could play fighters or a "Fighting-man"? There were women among both Arneson and Gygax's playtesters and they weren't always playing MUs. Pardon my bluntness but I found that statement astounding.

 

[Xiaochun]

No the larger hand is Arneson's and the really squiggly one is Dave Megarry (Dungeon Boardgame) who was taking notes dictated by Arneson as he read through.

Okay now that that is established, I want to go back to my question, Why didn't Arneson get a credit in the supplement Eldritch Wizardry if his notes were used in that book? I mean his name isn't even in the thank you part.

Because that seems to be something that would irk anyone and it makes you wonder if there are other instances of "theft".