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.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Just make sure that the ones you want to keep alive aren't wearing red.

No doubt. I'm surprised Scotty made it through the series myself. If I was joining Star Fleet I would have chosen area of emphasis based on shirt color.

 

[Anson Caralya]

Hmmm, maybe this should be moved to a "Retainer's rights" thread...? "Although I receive a fee, I will not be tasked with jumping into the fiend's maw to check his tonsils"?

(To go hopelessly off-topic, I love the way "Lost" knowingly brought back the red shirt concept.)

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Is that important?

Well, yeah!

One of the main reasons for which people are claiming to dislike ToH is that it is an unabashed meat-grinder of a PC-killer.

Gary - and Frank - have said that this is pretty much bollocks, because anyone who's playing intelligently and well can make it through without any PC deaths at all! In fact, they've offered several instances of anecdotal proof that it can be done.

What I'm trying to determine is if they're being a little intellectually dishonest.

I've got a theory that in these examples, sure, no PCs were killed, but over 40 characters (including various torch bearers, men-at-arms, sages, etc.) were lost their lives in breaching the Tomb. They just happened to not have the mystic star of PC floating over their heads.

In other words, it's not a PC killer if you play intelligently - where "play intelligently" is defined as "hire /summon lots of cannon fodder to poke and prod at anything remotely dangerous looking before you let the PCs anywhere near it."

EDIT:

Whereas those who seem to dislike it may have a more PC-centric view of things. The PCs are the heroes, the PCs are the ones risking their lives, and therefore it's the PCs who should be (largely alone) fighting and trapping and sleuthing their way through the Tomb.

For reference, I've never played in *any* game, in any version of the rules, in which we had anything approaching the number of hirelings or PCs that Gary has indicated was pretty standard, back in the day (i.e., 10+ PCs, an equal number of "trusted cohorts," several armed retainers, etc.).

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Well, yeah!

One of the main reasons for which people are claiming to dislike ToH is that it is an unabashed meat-grinder of a PC-killer.

Gary - and Frank - have said that this is pretty much bollocks, because anyone who's playing intelligently and well can make it through without any PC deaths at all! In fact, they've offered several instances of anecdotal proof that it can be done.

What I'm trying to determine is if they're being a little intellectually dishonest.

I've got a theory that in these examples, sure, no PCs were killed, but over 40 characters (including various torch bearers, men-at-arms, sages, etc.) were lost their lives in breaching the Tomb. They just happened to not have the mystic star of PC floating over their heads.

In other words, it's not a PC killer if you play intelligently - where "play intelligently" is defined as "hire /summon lots of cannon fodder to poke and prod at anything remotely dangerous looking before you let the PCs anywhere near it."

Well from reading the info on fighters and such in the 1e PH I think it was assumed that high level Fighter types would have retianers, followers, henchmen, men at arms, etc. So I think that the disconnect is the from gamers that have never played in the old "style" so to speak. I know I've read several oldschool adventures where they note henchmen for pregen NPC characters listed in the module. I think it is assumed that high level characters would have henchmen to command on adventures, and that they would fall in battle often. If you have some 4th level fighters travelling into a tomb with thier 11th level Fighter Lord then there will inevitably be losses among the lackeys.

P.S. I hate the term "intellectually dishonest" just come out and say "Liar".

 

[StupidSmurf]

Can't copyright that, but perhaps registering it as a trade mark will serve...


Gary

I sit corrected!

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

P.S. I hate the term "intellectually dishonest" just come out and say "Liar".

But I'm not calling them liars. Gary and Frank say that, on multiple occasions, there were no PC deaths. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that, in fact, no PCs met their death in a given number of ToH runs.

However, there might be a bit of behind-the-scenes shenanigans going on whereby "No PC Deaths" means "Thousands of nameless NPCs died so that the PCs didn't have to."

In other words, "No PC deaths" may not be the whole story, and concealing the rest of the story might be intellectually dishonest.

EDIT:

Heck, "No PC Deaths" could, in fact, mean "The PCs entered alone, fought and puzzled their way through, and won the day - all without a single PC death!"

Given other sources, however, I doubt it. But I'm leaving open the possibility that I'm wrong.

 

[trollwad]

yggsburgh and greyhawk deities

by my count, there are seven religious establishments in yggsburgh. If you use the greyhawk deities, which ones might be logical 'fits'?

btw, I like yggsburgh

 

[Orius]

Don't blame it on me,
I'm not guilty can't you see

I wasn't. IIRC, you steered the conversation away from it when it started becoming unfriendly.

 

[the black knight]

But I'm not calling them liars. Gary and Frank say that, on multiple occasions, there were no PC deaths. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that, in fact, no PCs met their death in a given number of ToH runs.

However, there might be a bit of behind-the-scenes shenanigans going on whereby "No PC Deaths" means "Thousands of nameless NPCs died so that the PCs didn't have to."

In other words, "No PC deaths" may not be the whole story, and concealing the rest of the story might be intellectually dishonest.

EDIT:

Heck, "No PC Deaths" could, in fact, mean "The PCs entered alone, fought and puzzled their way through, and won the day - all without a single PC death!"

Given other sources, however, I doubt it. But I'm leaving open the possibility that I'm wrong.

Wow, you have some real balls, Patryn, suggesting that Gary has been dishonest, and on his own thread no less. Why not drop the euphemistic dance and just call him a 'liar?'

You know, seems to me that anyone can play this speculative game. In fact, I'll give it a try and suggest that perhaps it is YOU that has some shenanegins going on, like maybe you're harbouring a deep seated desire to lash out at someone who has given joy to others through his creations. How's that? Have I gotten the hang of it?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'd hate to see Gary's thread locked so lets try not to get too nasty here.

Hey Gary, if I am using Greyhawk City as environs for CZ, do you think I can still get good value out of this volume since it doesn't go into the castle details much from what I read?

I just wish I could give you a potion of longevity to insure you could finish the series and treat gamers to your stuff for many many years to come. I tried to make one for you by mixing Jim Beam, Khaluha, & Guiness stout in a vial and let it cook overnight at low flame....well it took me a week to see again but I'm not deterred in the least.