Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9569283" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Oh, those are fighting words.I will be the first to say that I have issues with Ben Riggs- I appreciate that he does the work and I like the facts he uncovered, but I find that he tends to write in a way that doesn't do justice to the facts and tries to put everything in a &quot;goodies and baddies&quot; narrative.But Peterson? He always bring the receipts, and lets you judge for yourself. Sometimes, he can be too subtle- I had a conversation with another forum member after Game Wizards where the other person didn't realize that Gygax lied on the stand during the litigation after his ouster ... because Peterson didn't actually say that. Instead, he just pointed out that the judge didn't find his testimony credible (and the reasons why) which, yeah.If you only read PATW when it came out, I can understand why you might think his writing is a bit dry and impenetrable; but he has improved immensely and has learned how to keep his style and show the receipts while making his books much more readable and engaging. Seriously, he is doing the best work on D&amp;D (and RPG) history right now. And I love that he is careful and consistent and relies on source documents. I enjoy a good oral history as much as the next person (When We Were Wizards podcast!) but oral histories can never be as accurate as the type of sourced-history that he is doing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 9569283, member: 7023840"] Oh, those are fighting words. I will be the first to say that I have issues with Ben Riggs- I appreciate that he does the work and I like the facts he uncovered, but I find that he tends to write in a way that doesn't do justice to the facts and tries to put everything in a "goodies and baddies" narrative. But Peterson? He always bring the receipts, and lets you judge for yourself. Sometimes, he can be too subtle- I had a conversation with another forum member after [I]Game Wizards[/I] where the other person didn't realize that Gygax lied on the stand during the litigation after his ouster ... because Peterson didn't actually say that. Instead, he just pointed out that the judge didn't find his testimony credible (and the reasons why) which, yeah. If you only read PATW when it came out, I can understand why you might think his writing is a bit dry and impenetrable; but he has improved immensely and has learned how to keep his style and show the receipts while making his books much more readable and engaging. Seriously, he is doing the best work on D&D (and RPG) history right now. And I love that he is careful and consistent and relies on source documents. I enjoy a good oral history as much as the next person ([I]When We Were Wizards [/I]podcast!) but oral histories can never be as accurate as the type of sourced-history that he is doing. [/QUOTE]

Verification