The Dueling Essays of Arneson & Gygax

A recent article and documentary about Dave Arneson's involvement in Dungeons & Dragons shares a different perspective on the game's creation, with a particular emphasis on Rob Kuntz's testimony. Some of it contradicts what Gary Gygax positioned as D&D's origins. Fortunately we can read what both designers thoughts in their very own words -- published in the same book.

heroicworlds.jpg

Alzrius pointed out that both Arneson and Gygax contributed essays to Lawrence Schick's Heroic Worlds. What's startling is how their essays contradict each other just pages apart.

Heroic Worlds, published in 1991, was an attempt to catalog every tabletop role-playing games publication. It was a massive undertaking that was possible only because of the limited scope of the hobby. Thanks to electronic publishing, the Open Game License, and the Internet, tabletop gaming products have exploded -- DriveThruRPG has over 30,000 products alone -- making it impossible to produce a book of this scope ever again. It also provides a snapshot in time of the thoughts of various game designers, including Steve Jackon, Jennell Jaquays, Tom Moldavy, Sandy Petersen, Ken St. Andre, Michael Stackpole, Greg Stafford, Erick Wujcik and more.

Arneson kicks off the D&D controversy on page 131:
My first set of miniatures rules was for fighting out battles with sailing ships. This led me to meet several people, including Gary Gygax, at an early GenCon. These people later participated in a historical campaign I refereed. When I began refereeing what later became D&D in Minnesota, I mentioned it to them. They were interested, and when some of us went down to visit we all played this strange game...the lads in Lake Geneva got turned on to it. Tactical Studies Rules, a Lake Geneva-based game company, was already publishing historical rules and was willing to do D&D.
Gygax follows up on the origins of D&D in a short one-page essay on the very next page:
In the late 1960s a club called the Lake Geneva Tactical Studies Association met weekly at my home for military/naval miniatures gaming. From this activity sprang Chainmail. The D&D game was drawn from its rules, and that is indisputable. Chainmail was the progenitor of D&D, but the child grew to excel its parent.
This point is disputed by RPG archivist, Paul Stromberg, in the Kotaku article, "Dungeons & Deceptions: The First D&D Players Push Back On The Legend Of Gary Gygax":
“People think that Blackmoor arose from Chainmail, and thus Chainmail gave rise to Dungeons & Dragons. That is not correct,” said Stormberg, the RPG historian. While Chainmail, amongst other things, was an influence on Blackmoor, Arneson’s game was “entirely new,” he said. “It’s a game entirely unlike Chainmail. It’s like saying a Rodin uses red and a Picasso uses red so they’re the same style of painting.”
This perspective is shared by Arneson himself in his first essay:
Contrary to rumor, the players and I were all quite in control of our mental processes when D&D was designed. I also hasten to point out hat the Chainmail connection was the use of the Combat Matrix and nothing more. Find a first-edition Chainmail and compare it to a first-edition Original D&D someday and you will see that for yourself: not a hit point, character class, level, or armor class, much less any role-playing aspects in Chainmail.
Arneson's perspective on the game industry comes through in the other essays scattered throughout the book. Here's his version of how Blackmoor came about:
I originally began with a simple dungeon and expanded it into several dungeons loosely organized as a campaign. The rules were not really an organized set, more notes on what I had earlier. Today people expect a lot more detail, coherency, organization, and story.
Here's Arneson's thoughts on writing a scenario:
When I design a scenario, sometimes the plot or situation will come from books I read, and sometimes it just pops into my head...Changes are made, and then the work is sent off to be butchered--er, ah, edited, I mean...The original Blackmoor supplement included what was the very first published scenario. My intention was that it would serve as a guideline for other GMs to design their own. Instead, it spawn an entire "service" industry. Oh, well...
And finally here's what Arneson thought of the game industry:
My serious advice to the would-be role-playing-game author will sound cruel and heartless, and most will be offended and not listen. To would be game designers I say: seek useful employment in another field...play your own house rules with your friends and associates; it will be less painful and far more fun. (On the other hand, frankly, I wouldn't have listened to an old fogey like me.)
Gygax's thoughts on the subject of D&D are well-known; Arneson's less so, and Heroic Worlds is a trove of his perspective on tabletop gaming and publishing, undoubtedly informed by his legal tussles with TSR. The difference between Arenson and Gygax's approach to gaming is starkly illustrated in their essays. And yet, despite their long and sometimes antagonistic history, Gygax ends his essay on a hopeful note:
Dave Arneson and I have spoken frequently since the time we devised D&D. We don't plan to collaborate on another game, but just maybe one day he'll decide to combine talents again.
Did Gygax mean "we'll" instead of "he'll"? Gygax ends the essay with our only answer: Who knows?
 
Last edited:
Michael Tresca

Comments

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
I made sure that was part of your post that I quoted. ;)
Also, since we beat that other thing to death, why the heck aren't these public records freely available? Pacer remains, to this day, a scam.

At the very least, they should release them without charge after a period of time. I can understand the issues with going back and digitizing older court documents (although there are those ahem Google who would do so) but there is no good reason that they keep all of that behind a difficult-to-use interface that charges per page! Most STATE court systems are more friendly, today, than our federal system.


/rant
 

Mort

Community Supporter
Also, since we beat that other thing to death, why the heck aren't these public records freely available? Pacer remains, to this day, a scam.

At the very least, they should release them without charge after a period of time. I can understand the issues with going back and digitizing older court documents (although there are those ahem Google who would do so) but there is no good reason that they keep all of that behind a difficult-to-use interface that charges per page! Most STATE court systems are more friendly, today, than our federal system.


/rant
We switched over (mostly) to Courtlink (by Lexis). It's got it's own issues, but you pay by per user per month and it's a lot less than we were paying pacer per page.
 

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
We switched over (mostly) to Courtlink (by Lexis). It's got it's own issues, but you pay by per user per month and it's a lot less than we were paying pacer per page.
Well, for more official stuff I don't have a problem, if you know what I mean.

It's more when I want to do my own research. ;)

(EDIT- and, of course, the principle. Everyone should have access to public records. IMO. )
 

Yaarel

Adventurer
They did not do that though. Yaarel said they spoke to someone who said they spoke to direct parties.
For clarification, I spoke to someone who spoke to the direct parties.

For me, it is only one person removed.

For those reading this, it is two persons removed (including me).
 

Yaarel

Adventurer
When the same person resorts to ad hominem attacks, making comments that anyone who disagrees is blinded by their diefication of Gygax without any sort of evidence.

So if there's a lesson learned here Yaarel, if you want people to give credibility to your anecdotal evidence, you might want to avoid character assassination of the subject, ad hominems, and baseless accusations.
Fair enough. Heh, I did accuse you deifying Gygax. I will apologize and retract that accusation. I can see, that bothered you, and you probably are more rational regarding Gygax.

The ‘primacy of Gygax’ is a thing, and I am sorry I included you in that group.

At the same time, I myself have endured occasionally vicious character assassination here in this thread.

If there is a specific question that you asked me, that I didnt answer. Remind me, and I will answer as honestly as possible.
 

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
For clarification, I spoke to someone who spoke to the direct parties.
For full clarification, two days ago (Wednesday) you knew nothing about this. None of the history, none of the cases, nothing.

Yesterday when you were repeatedly .... um .... let's say that it was repeatedly pointed out to you that you didn't know about what you were talking about, you knew nothing about this.

And now, this morning, you talked to someone who talked to an attorney about this ... or to one of the "direct parties" ...

Hmmm.... Okay. I'll bite. Who is this person you talked to?
 

Yaarel

Adventurer
Cool. New information.

The discovery phase of the court case did happen. This is when the judge looked the evidentiary documents and recommended that Arneson and Gygax settle out of court.

Arneson’s claim on D&D 1e (as well as D&D 0e) is strong.

The out of court settlement in favor of Arneson appears to be in the order of 3 million dollars.

I am posting this information, not to ‘prove’ anything, but I care about accurate history. For those who care about accurate history, consider these ‘leads’ to follow up on.
 

DWChancellor

Kobold Enthusiast
At the very least, they should release them without charge after a period of time. I can understand the issues with going back and digitizing older court documents (although there are those ahem Google who would do so) but there is no good reason that they keep all of that behind a difficult-to-use interface that charges per page! Most STATE court systems are more friendly, today, than our federal system.
/rant
If you think public facing systems are bad, try working with internal ones. Let's not forget invitations to visit "our public reading room [locating in DC, maybe, if they still have it]."
 

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Cool. New information.

The discovery phase of the court case did happen. This is when the judge looked the evidentiary documents and recommended that Arneson and Gygax settle out of court.

Arneson’s claim on D&D 1e (as well as D&D 0e) is strong.

The out of court settlement in favor of Arneson appears to be in the order of 3 million dollars.

I am posting this information, not to ‘prove’ anything, but I care about accurate history. For those who care about accurate history, consider these ‘leads’ to follow up on.
Fine. I'll say it now. Either post source, or stop lying. For those who can't bother to look back in the thread, this is the same individual who did not know anything about any of this as recently as Wednesday, and had no idea where the Thief class came from, and has repeatedly made stuff up.

So post your source, or stop.

But to make things clear:

1. Discovery is not when the judge sees information. Discovery is when parties get information from each other. Federal judges don't summon parties, in a case with a jury trial, in chambers and say, "Hey, why don't you show me all you evidence, and then I will tell you what I think!" There's rules, and stuff, about that. But you wouldn't know that, would you. Because you don't understand how ridiculous all of your posts have been.

2. There is no "claim," just a question of what constituted those items that would provide royalties under the original agreement. You don't even understand what you're discussing.

3. You don't know what you're talking about when you're saying that the "out of court settlement" favored Arneson. We do know that TSR was not paying Arneson any royalties on the core books; therefore, his contention (that he gets paid 5% of EVERYTHING) and their contention (he gets paid 5% of only the OD&D rule sets) became the settlement we see, which included 2.5% on the AD&D core rule books (PHB, DMG, MM). Any settlement would necessarily include royalties dating back to the time of the release. So ....

Why am I even explaining this to you?

You literally have spammed this thread repeatedly with nonsense. From "Derp, I know the secret history of the Thief that is completely different than the truth!" to this stuff. Please, please, stop.
 

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Yeah I was going to say I don't think Discovery is "the judges look at evidence", its the parties getting stuff from each other.
He's said so many things that are flat-out wrong, it's hard to keep track. But it's making me feel mean - most of this is stuff that a 2L would catch, or, for that matter, someone who has watched a Law & Order Marathon. ;)

I once had an acquaintance in college that was ... uncomfortable with veracity, shall we say, and habitually said things that weren't quite right. However, when challenged, instead of backing down, this individual would double down with even more fantastical things that had a scant relation to reality.

It's fun to watch the wheels spin for a while, but then it just seems cruel.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member

Okay... that's enough. I think you've laid out the the facts and logic as currently known. Folks should not attack the person of the poster over it, please and thanks.
 

Aldarron

Explorer
Arnesons group invented D&D.

The wife of one of the players of Arnesons game typed out the transcripts of the sessions of this game.

They mailed these transcripts to Gygax.

Gygax struggled to figure out the rules of the game that are implied in these transcripts.

TSR published this codification of Arnesons game as ‘Dungeons & Dragons’.

Arneson − along with his players − invented it.
No they didn't. Arnesons group originated fantasy role play gaming in the United States. True.

Mrs. Gaylord did type manuscripts of some of their various games, including retyping a draft of D&D by Gygax which incorporated some of their notes.

It would be accurate to say "they invented the core concepts of D&D", that;s true.

But those core concepts have been used in many games that aren't "D&D", for example, RoleMaster, Warhammer, Pendragon - you name it. Obviously, Dave Arneson didn't invent Warhammer.

So to say they, by themselves "invented D&D" is simply inaccurate, because D&D is a specific product for which Gygax was the rules editor, primary writer, and publisher.
 

Aldarron

Explorer
It is an academic error to ignore the Arneson transcripts.

Gygax is reading these transcripts with great attention.

Gygax himself knows Megarry invented the Thief character.

Whether TSR publishes rules for Thief early or late is irrelevant.
David Megarry does not claim to have invented the thief character class. He says he played the first thief character.

You are conflating two different things and it is going to simply confuse any uniformed readers. In the Blackmoor campaign, the players took on roles. They could be a wizard, and there were rules for how wizards advance in various levels - up to twelve that we know of. Or they could be a non-wizard - basically a fighter who could go from Flunky to Hero to Superhero to Lord.

These non-wizards could play any type of profession they liked - what in todays 5e world would be called a character Background. So, there was an inspector general (John Snider), a Dwarf (Ross Maker), a Merchant (Dan Nicholson) and yes a thief to thwart the merchant played by Megarry.

These "backgrounds" eventually became codified as classes in D&D, but in Blackmoor they were mechanically all the same. The thief class as an actually class with its own rules was invented by Daniel Wagoner in Aero hobbies as has been pointed out already.

Oh, one other thing, "Arneson transcripts" is simply confusing. There are a lot of various materials, like the Corner of the Table fanzine, letters, or the character sheets I've shown on my blog, which is I guess what you mean, but there is no unified body of transcripts per se.
 
Last edited:

Aldarron

Explorer
I'll also posit this: no one invented the concept of the thief class. Every player who played their PC to be sneaky and steal stuff was a thief. The thief concept has been established since the beginning of time, all throughout literary history. It's probably the second most common archetype right after the warrior. Whoever created the class as a standalone class with unique skills and/or attributes gets credit. And that seems to be Gary Switzer. Notes saying "so and so played their character really sneaky like a thief" doesn't cut it because that concept has been around for ages.
Daniel Wagoner, actually. Switzer as the one who made the phone call. You can read about it Here on ODD74
 

Advertisement

Latest threads

Advertisement

Top