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.

 

[Storm Raven]

The primary appeal of the Druid class from a creative standpoint is that the Romans were so thorough in destroying them and their religion that we know virtually nothing about either

Maybe it is just me, but when I first started playing D&D, the only "druid" I was familiar with was Getafix. I tried to find that super-strength potion on the druiid list of abilities, but was disapponted it wasn't there.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

I don't think we have any way to determine accurately which edition has more people regularly playing it. Leaving aside the question of how to determine who is a player, and who is just a collector, and who is "regularly" as opposed to "sporadically" playing, we simply have no verifiable sales data for the books that would allow for a good comparison...

But I think your argument that the DM is disempowered in 3e is just off-base...

"We" do have some pretty good information regarding sales of OAD&D compared to 3E, although WotC is not trumpeting it, and the former were considerably higher than than the latter from what insiders and purveyors of RPGs ahve told me. As there is no likely difference between the two games in regards to who did and does do what with them, the remainder of your argument is invalid.

The plethoras of rules in new D&D speaks volumes as to your latter assertion, as does the manner in which players approach 3E, memorizing and quoting rules to the DM.

If you enjoy the new game fine. There is no point in discussing this further. My opinions stand as do yours.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Maybe it is just me, but when I first started playing D&D, the only "druid" I was familiar with was Getafix. I tried to find that super-strength potion on the druiid list of abilities, but was disapponted it wasn't there.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[nyrfherdr]

Hey Gary,
Nice to see you back in action. We were all concerned for your health.
Take care of yourself and your family.

I don't have any questions, it's just nice to see you active on the boards again.

Game ON!
nyrfherdr

 

[Storm Raven]

"We" do have some pretty good information regarding sales of OAD&D compared to 3E, although WotC is not trumpeting it, and the former were considerably higher than than the latter from what insiders and purveyors of RPGs ahve told me. As there is no likely difference between the two games in regards to who did and does do what with them, the remainder of your argument is invalid.

The information is not publicly available, nor is it verified. Until that happens, all claims (unfortunately, including those of insiders and purveyors of RPGs) are entirely unreliable - especially since the distribution chain has changed significantly between 1975 and 2007.

The plethoras of rules in new D&D speaks volumes as to your latter assertion, as does the manner in which players approach 3E, memorizing and quoting rules to the DM.

Are you really claiming that players didn't memorize and quote rules to the DM in the "old days"? Maybe not at your personal table, but in my experience, it happened all the time. The rules-lawyer is a consequence of personality, not system. Are you saying that there were not reams of rules in the "old days"? I'd argue that the volume of rules per page is less in most of the new products than it was in many earlier edition products, or at the very least they are simpler to use as they aren't a collection of several dozen unique subsystems each with its own set of rules for use.

Here's what I think the real source of your position is: when playing Chainmail/OD&D/AD&D, you were intimately familiar with the system you played with. Your version of the game was not the one that was published - you had a collection of house rules, personal to you and your players, that you were familiar with and used (I believe you have stated publicly that you didn't play AD&D as written in the published rules). The game seemed, as a result, easy, intuitive, and no one argued about much, because you had already decided how to fill in the gaps and make judgment calls.

When you looked at the 3e rules, they were different. Trying to assess the play style, you assumed all the rules would be used, and people would insist on it. You've heard here and there about people having problems with players quoting rules to the DM and rules-lawyering up a storm. Because you did not grow the system from its roots, and weren't along for the ride over the course of its development, it seems a lot more complicated. Based on almost no evidence at all, you seem to think that DMs have limited authority now, despite the many times this is contradicted in the 3e books.

However, my experience with older editions of D&D is very different from what I have hypothesized yours was. I came to the system when it was a finished rules set - published for public consumption. The groups I played in tried to use all the rules, because they were tprinted in the books, we supposed, we were clearly meant to use them. The early attempts to play D&D were a mess, and until we started playing using a raft of house rules to cover up the problem areas, arguments and "DM challeneges" abounded (none of which was helped by your now-infamous and probably misunderstood "if you aren't playing by the rules as written, you aren't playing D&D" missive). Much of D&D felt arbitrary and counterintuitive, because we had not seen the system evolve as you had. In many ways, we played D&D despite the rules, not because of them.

The current system is not really that different in this regard. Playing using all of the rules is still difficult - although not as much so. But the game states clearly, both in the PHB and the DMG that it is up to the DM to decide how the game will be played, what rules will and won't be used, and what options, choices, and alternatives are available in the campaign.

To you, older D&D feels "organic", and the new edition feels "rulesy". Neither is the case. They are pretty much equally "rulesy", I suspect that it is just your familiarity with one and lack of familiarity with the other than gives you this impression.

 

[robertsconley]

Did Bob Bledsaw and Judges Guild have any influence on development of 1st Edition AD&D?

Just curious

Thanks
Rob Conley

 

[Ardenian]

SR,
i would offer that there are more rules now - and each Splat book released offer more rules to interlock with existing rules - even if the core rule books have no mention of them... like in all RPG's there are rules that the "house" will modify, expound apon and eliminate - it's like that in every game setting - although in the 3.x rule set - you have a vast increase in ruels in comparison to the 1.0 rule set. Not worse, not better (IMO) just more, and different. I had a great time playing the 1.0 rule set - and created my own game system that incorporated the specific 1.0 rules from AD+D, gear and ideas from Star Frontiers, Mech Warrior and Rifts (just to name a few).. i'm currently playing the 3.5 rule set and having a good time - although there seems to be a increase in comments like "Gimme a sec i need to look something up..." than there was 20 years ago.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Hey Gary,
Nice to see you back in action. We were all concerned for your health.
Take care of yourself and your family.

I don't have any questions, it's just nice to see you active on the boards again.

Game ON!
nyrfherdr

Thanks

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Storm Raven,

As it happens I was not only a director and officer of TSR back through 1985, but I also received royalty reports for AD&D sales, so there is no problem in me varifying them. Also, I have no reason to doubt what i have been told regarding sales of 3E--and 3.5E for that matter. Indeed distribution has changed since I was CEO of TSR. It is far worse today, and RPG sales are way down. There is great concern amongst many game publishers in this tegard. That said, I do not believe any further discussion of this matter will be fruitful, so I am dropping the topic.

As for familiarity, I had the distinct chore of spending many sessions playing a 3E based module. The time wasted in looking up rules, typically by players, and then arguing with the two DMs about how to apply them, demanding thaey be applied, was tedious indeed. This happens in many groups I am informed. I never saw nor heard of an OAD&D DM that would tolerate such behavior.

Now let us drop this subject and move on to something interesting.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Did Bob Bledsaw and Judges Guild have any influence on development of 1st Edition AD&D?

Just curious

Thanks
Rob Conley

Surely you jest!


Gary