TSR Q&A with Gary Gygax

This is the multi-year Q&A sessions held by D&D co-creator Gary Gygax here at EN World, beginning in 2002 and running up until his sad pasing in 2008. Gary's username in the thread below is Col_Pladoh, and his first post in this long thread is Post #39.

 

[Barak]

While a paladin PC springs to mind, any character class will serve, and some, such as a thief or assassin, would demand some truly awesome roleplay to carry off the matter

While thief -might- be a stretch, given the bloody history of most religions, assassins would be -easy-...

Heck, the word itself has religious connotations, after all.

 

[jasper]

What ( most some few none all) {select the one you like} forget is D&D in any form is a GAME. All games have rules. And all rules don't have to make sense. The game is not the story. The story is what happen during the game.
Just like the time me and my brother got my parents, my uncle and aunt to play Life with us and my Aunt won while Daddy when to the poor house with 1 kid and Jr went to poor house with 4 girls and 3 boys.
all games and hobbies give you stories to tell. They are only interesting if they are told in a interesting fashion and to some one who shares your interest.

 

[gideon_thorne]

While thief -might- be a stretch, given the bloody history of most religions, assassins would be -easy-...

Heck, the word itself has religious connotations, after all.

The word assassin has as a popular historical evolution from a sort of hashish religious sect known as the hassassin..

 

[Barak]

The word assassin has as a popular historical evolution from a sort of hashish religious sect known as the hassassin..

Hmm yup. That's what I was getting at.

 

[Storm Raven]

Yes. Which work of lit? I dunno.

Except now you are shifting your argument. Previously you have asserted that the level limits reflected the themes of fantasy literature. Now thaqt I ask which works of literature and mythology you draw that assertion from, and you dodge.

Who said the game has to be strictly drawn from existing literature? It is redundant to say again, but if you want elves to be more, or as powerful in your game, then I say uncap that level limit pronto! I was simply trying to argue the point that level limits can be justified in my opinion. It's all about suspension of disbelief and we all have our own ideas of what should or should not be gamewise.

I'm trying to figure out what was the impetus behind making demi-humans dominate lower level play and then have level caps slapped on so as to allow for a "humanocentric" world. Given the desire to have huamnocentric world, it seems odd to have desinged all of the demi-human races to be clearly superior to humans, exscept for those handful who happened to reach 10th+ level in experience.

 

[Storm Raven]

Yes,i do really think that unlimited demi-human races will absolutelt obviate the humanocentric bases for a campaign world...unless the demi-humans are very few and far between. to have them as an integral part of the campaign world, one must have them limited in potential to something less than the dominant humans.

You have asserted this several times, which is what drives my question. You assert that it is an essential element to creating a humanocentric world that you have level limits. Why not, instead create a situation in which demi-humans natural abilites were not obviously superior to humans, but instead more focused, or balanced with drawbacks that accompany their bonuses? You seem to say this is the only way you could have done it, my question is were other ideas considered and rejected, and if so what were they and why were they rejected in favor of such a seemingly arbitrary system?

 

[Storm Raven]

Where are there any elves at all in the majority of fantasy literature?

They exist in Tolkien. And Lloyd Alexander's work (as the fair folk), and Celtic myth (as the sidhe) and the Moorcock's works (in, for example, Knight of Swords) and so on and so forth.

 

[Storm Raven]

As I said before, get a life and forget about all this silly quibbling. After all is siad and done, dwarves are so unbelievable as to be completely irrational. They live underground in caves and drink ale and eat meat. Where do their supplies come from?

I suppose trade isn't an option?

Where, outside of my assertion if D&D that they have a strong constitution, does that "logical" assumption come from.

From a wide variety of sources. But you should know that already.

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

So why are you arguing? You don't like or understand the logic, then change it to fit you ideal. Instead of complaining about why Life isn't more liek monopoly or payday just change the rules you want and go on. No answer any one gives will satisfy you because, you have your own idea of what the solution should be, so use it.
Ken

 

[Col_Pladoh]

While thief -might- be a stretch, given the bloody history of most religions, assassins would be -easy-...

Heck, the word itself has religious connotations, after all.

I think a thief would be easy, and the temple of whatever non goody-goody deity would likely praise his generous contrbutions--all taken from non-believers, of course

Cheers,
Gary