History: Forbidden History
- Thread starter nedjer
- Start date
Nifft
Penguin Herder
I got to the end by skipping over some of the Golden Bough excerpts!
It's an interesting hypothesis you're putting forward, but I must confess that I personally don't feel the force of it.
First, the discussion of social formations in the DMG and UA (and the change-of-mind as to whether it is good or bad for the game to include a social-status system) doesn't seem to me to speak to a particularly sophisticated sociology. It's fairly generic, and pales in comparison to (for example) the discussion of social forms in Rolemaster Companion VI, which is clearly written by someone with a good undergraduate (or higher) training in sociology and world history.
Second, but related, the AD&D rules don't really involve players "describing and structuring" fantasy worlds and societies. An OD&D-style megadungeon is not a society, and is barely a world, and in any event doesn't evince a very rich structure in the sociological sense. And AD&D, in which the megadungeon looms less large, doesn't say much about structures at all.
Third, the alignment system does not demonstrate any particular familiarity with either moral philosophy or the sociology of morals. Law vs Chaos seems to be derived from Moorcock and others, who in turn draw upon various mythological traditions. The addition of Good and Evil I don't know the historical explanation for (ie who, if anyonem, influenced Gygax in that respect), but the resulting structure is not one which I've ever seen "brought to life" in any interesting way via player agency. The history of the game tends to suggest that it's a serious impediment to player agency, and indeed that seems to have been one of the main motivations for it - in the absence of a socially rich gameworld in which the PCs are embedded and the players emotionally invested, alignment establishes a game-mechanical pressure against players acting out anti-social fantasies.
Fourth, I think the classes and races - with their origins in Chainmail - reflect conventions of wargaming, with units of different types or classes, rather than an attempt to establish a structural framework which player agency brings to life. It's often asserted that "classes are archetypes", but I don't accept this. If classses really were archetypes, than Druids and Magic-Users would be the same class (Merlin, Taoist mystics, stereotypical witch-doctors, etc), as would Clerics and Paladins - and that's leaving to one side the highly questionable notion that "medieaval Christian warrior" is some sort of archetype at all, as opposed to a rather parochial phenomenon of the European Middle Ages.
Undoubtedly Gygax was familiar with a wide range of myths, legends and history. So was REH. But to in my opinion there is little of sociological (as opposed to aesthetic) merit in REH's work, and I find the same to be true of D&D.
nedjer
Adventurer
The Victorians were very gassy.
But hyper-diffusionism is the notion that one 'culture' spread throughout the globe and formed the basis of most of the civilisations of the ancient world. This was very trendy in Victorian society and resurfaced bigtime with Thor Hyerdahl's (?) Ra boat trips, Erich von 'Mad as a Hatter' Daniken and Charles 'Bermuda Zone Atlantis' Berlitz.
This was 90% cobblers, but sold well, and received a later boost from Hancock's 'Fingerpainting of the Gods', which is 80% cobblers. They all use a highly selective and excluding approach to evidence.
Levi-Strauss offers a different approach, based on the model that all humans need to navigate, tracking sky features/ skymaps help you navigate night and day, so everyone, everywhere starts to develop and interest in the best ways of telling the time and getting around.
At present, the 'scientific' view (can't claim to speak for all) is a complex mix of both. Ancient peoples moved around a lot more than we thought but civilisations can/ typically reach a stage between shamanism and a proto-science, where there's a huge, local investment in developing the means to time and navigate. This protects the 'priesthood/ older who control valuable knowledge, and the political structure which can use or pass the buck to the knwoledge and the priests. Basically, a good way to avoid regicide as soon as someone younger and tougher comes along.
nedjer
Adventurer
Wouldn't go as far as a hypothesis, more rambling conjecture at thsi stage. Good points there:
The 'social structures' in the 1e PH and DMG are more structured and defined than anything before. More tenously, the change of mind mirrors the move from structuralism to post-structuralism which Levi-Strauss and social anthropology was going through after Sartre and Barthes beat-up on structuralism?
One of Gary's major contributions was the Giants and Drow module series, where he changed our understanding of campaigns, introduced 'ecology' on a grand scale and presented a series of highly structured societies?
I'm 'interpreting' this as dynamic, where Gary was going through the same kind of process as others at the time. From, the benefits of structure, to a realisation that it becomes a straight-jacket on gameplay/ personal agency, to a compromise between the two, and an integration of sythesis of the two, (which never arrived, because the prevalent business model relied/ relies on selling structure and seeks to exclude personal agency for profit, i.e the game theory view that people are resources. Which persists in ignoring the evidence that we're resource and emotion focused.
Classes and sub-classes are maybe stereotypes/ common constructs (steering clear of archetypes here). We don't just get heros, we get accidental heros, tragic heros, super-heroes . . . there aren't just angels, there are sub-classes, there aren't just priests or clerics, there is a whole hierarchy of positions with different material and spiritual attributes assigned to them. D&D's classes and sub-classes are, surely, a long way removed from 'I'm Rommel and my Panthers are lobbing a 72mm into your Sherman'?
Ran out of time for now but be good to hear more 'devil's advocacy'
Doug McCrae
Legend
D&D's classes are in large part differentiated by the armor they wear and weapons they wield, in the same way that soldiers on a battlefield are differentiated - light infantry, heavy infantry, pikemen, archers, etc.
Chainmail's troop types include Peasants, Light Foot/Archers, Heavy Foot, Armored Foot, Landsknechte/Swiss, Arquibusiers/Crossbowmen, Longbowmen, Light Horse, Medium Horse, Heavy Horse.
These would all count as fighting men. The fantasy supplement for Chainmail adds Hero and Super Hero (equal to four or eight fighting men), and Magic Users, who are sub-divided by power level from seers (the weakest) up to wizards (the most powerful), much like D&D level titles for magic users.
So you could see the D&D class divide as being present in Chainmail, definitely in the fantasy supplement. The supplement is really where the concept of levels comes from.
I'm not up on my structuralism and post-structuralism, but perhaps it would be appropriate to see Gary's increasingly rules heavy systems - OD&D, AD&D and finally Dangerous Journeys - as structuralist, whereas Lejendary Adventure, which is more 'rules lite', could be seen as post-structuralist.
Chainmail's troop types include Peasants, Light Foot/Archers, Heavy Foot, Armored Foot, Landsknechte/Swiss, Arquibusiers/Crossbowmen, Longbowmen, Light Horse, Medium Horse, Heavy Horse.
These would all count as fighting men. The fantasy supplement for Chainmail adds Hero and Super Hero (equal to four or eight fighting men), and Magic Users, who are sub-divided by power level from seers (the weakest) up to wizards (the most powerful), much like D&D level titles for magic users.
So you could see the D&D class divide as being present in Chainmail, definitely in the fantasy supplement. The supplement is really where the concept of levels comes from.
I'm not up on my structuralism and post-structuralism, but perhaps it would be appropriate to see Gary's increasingly rules heavy systems - OD&D, AD&D and finally Dangerous Journeys - as structuralist, whereas Lejendary Adventure, which is more 'rules lite', could be seen as post-structuralist.
Last edited:
nedjer
Adventurer
I guess I see that as consistent with glueing ideas and bits together and experimenting in OD&D, then Gary takes complete control over the 1e PH and everything gets much more structured and scaled up (and largely fits together); followed by the 'structured ecological' modules. Then an attempt to get structuralism 'right' and a later acceptance of the benefits of integrating both approaches to give a structural framework that supports greater player agency/ less 'railroading'.
Nifft
Penguin Herder
That makes sense. Thanks, -- N
nedjer
Adventurer
Lichs, Golden Fleeces, Great Wheels and now . . . Cerberus:
[FONT="]"The Twelve Trials of the Hero, for example, are parables to guide the soul through the tests and tribulations of life. The hero is identified with the sun, and his progress is symbolically represented by the sun passing through the twelve signs of the zodiac. The hero is 'everyman', and his journey is the journey made by all of us. The trials of the hero's path are symbols of the obstacles that each soul must face and overcome.[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]The Twelve Trials of Heracles, for instance, include a journey to the underworld to bring back the triple-headed hound of hell. The descent to the underworld symbolically represents the incarnation of the soul into a human life. The triple-headed hound of hell is a symbol of time - past, present and future. The first of the monster's heads is that of a wolf, which, like the past, drags its prey away into the darkness. The second is that of a lion, which, like the present, leaps upon its victim in one awful second. The third is that of a dog, which forlornly looks up to its master in the same way that we look to the future with desperate hope of better things to come. This myth teaches that the hero must overcome time if he is to find the eternal oneness of God and escape the Grievous Wheel."[/FONT]
[FONT="]p71, The Complete Guide to World Mysticism by Freke, T. and Gandy, P., Piatkus, 1997, ISBN: 0749917768, £10.99[/FONT]
[FONT="]"The Twelve Trials of the Hero, for example, are parables to guide the soul through the tests and tribulations of life. The hero is identified with the sun, and his progress is symbolically represented by the sun passing through the twelve signs of the zodiac. The hero is 'everyman', and his journey is the journey made by all of us. The trials of the hero's path are symbols of the obstacles that each soul must face and overcome.[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]The Twelve Trials of Heracles, for instance, include a journey to the underworld to bring back the triple-headed hound of hell. The descent to the underworld symbolically represents the incarnation of the soul into a human life. The triple-headed hound of hell is a symbol of time - past, present and future. The first of the monster's heads is that of a wolf, which, like the past, drags its prey away into the darkness. The second is that of a lion, which, like the present, leaps upon its victim in one awful second. The third is that of a dog, which forlornly looks up to its master in the same way that we look to the future with desperate hope of better things to come. This myth teaches that the hero must overcome time if he is to find the eternal oneness of God and escape the Grievous Wheel."[/FONT]
[FONT="]p71, The Complete Guide to World Mysticism by Freke, T. and Gandy, P., Piatkus, 1997, ISBN: 0749917768, £10.99[/FONT]
