TSR 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.

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?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Mort]

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]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Yaarel]

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]

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]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Yaarel]

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]

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]

*Deleted by user*