D&D General The Human Side of D&D History - From Gary Gygax to Temple of Elemental Evil

it isn’t, and that also was not the context of this statement

I realize you were not saying it was relevant to what he made. I added that because I said so much about it in my post I just wanted to make my own view on it clear
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Voadam said:
Similar to the 1e DMG goodwife entry (goodwives will make false rape claims in response to any offensive treatment or seeming threat)

Sorry I haven't been following the Gygax story all that much but what are you referring to here? Am I reading you right - in that there is an entry in 1e about good wives calling out a false #metoo so to speak?
 

Evil orcs are racist because they are dark skinned?
I assume the pig nose 🐽 orcs had skin colors like pigs 🐖 , who vary a bit but are mostly pinkish pale, AKA white among humans. And green orcs are green, no?

But really, the important question is, why does it matter?
Good question.

Internet discussion of a fantasy game seems prone to nonsensical battles that make faculty arguments seem tame. I admire posts like “I have X idea” or “I’m looking for advice on Y”, but the traffic mostly goes to “Z is the worst! No it isn’t!!” endless threads. And I assume my behavior of looking at what’s new is common.

BTW, great moderation, Umbran. I’m impressed by your control on this thread.

On the same note, Gary is dead. Why is it important to keep pointing out, every couple months, that he was sexist. What does that do?
It seems he’s treated as a symbol for axes to grind, rather than an artist who died 16 years ago.
 

I assume the pig nose 🐽 orcs had skin colors like pigs 🐖 , who vary a bit but are mostly pinkish pale, AKA white among humans.
not according to their description

“Orcs appear particularly disgusting because their coloration — brown or brownish green with a bluish sheen — highlights their pinkish snouts and ears. Their bristly hair is dark brown or black, sometimes with tan patches.”
 



Sorry I haven't been following the Gygax story all that much but what are you referring to here? Am I reading you right - in that there is an entry in 1e about good wives calling out a false #metoo so to speak?
1e DMG had city encounter tables that included an entry for goodwives.

Page 192:

"Goodwife encounters are with a single woman, often indistinguishable from any other type of female (such as a magic-user, harlot, etc.). Any offensive treatment or seeming threat will be likely to cause the woman to scream for help, accusing the offending party of any number of crimes, i.e. assault, rape, theft, or murder. 20% of goodwives know interesting gossip."

So not exclusively false claims of rape but yes false claims of rape.
 

1e DMG had city encounter tables that included an entry for goodwives.

Page 192:

"Goodwife encounters are with a single woman, often indistinguishable from any other type of female (such as a magic-user, harlot, etc.). Any offensive treatment or seeming threat will be likely to cause the woman to scream for help, accusing the offending party of any number of crimes, i.e. assault, rape, theft, or murder. 20% of goodwives know interesting gossip."

So not exclusively false claims of rape but yes false claims of rape.
Thanks for this. I just cracked open my 1e DMG. I had forgotten how many neat detailed tables there were.
I started with BECMI and then read 1e but moved to 2e relatively quickly, so my 1e experience was just mostly musing over the PHB predominantly.
 

1e DMG had city encounter tables that included an entry for goodwives.

Page 192:

"Goodwife encounters are with a single woman, often indistinguishable from any other type of female (such as a magic-user, harlot, etc.). Any offensive treatment or seeming threat will be likely to cause the woman to scream for help, accusing the offending party of any number of crimes, i.e. assault, rape, theft, or murder. 20% of goodwives know interesting gossip."

So not exclusively false claims of rape but yes false claims of rape.
From everything I could find from everyone I could speak to, that was meant to be a joke. But here's the thing (not limited to this) to all those who hand wave away that as a joke. An offensive joke is still offensive. It doesn't make it better because you were trying to be funny.*

Ironically, I am finding the people who say "Chill out, it was a joke" and the people who got really upset about the WotC disclaimers is a near overlapping circle.

* Knowing that in the 70s and 80s such a joke would be socially accepted. But man has it not aged well even if you take it as a joke and not a serious table entry. Like the aforementioned 16 Candles (as an aside most people think of the Asian racist jokes right away, but forget that the "heroes" of the movie have a discussion about raping a passed out girl.)
 
Last edited:

He’s kinda dead. I don’t think anything I or anyone else says is going to change that. But in all seriousness, no one in the Gygax family is in the midst of this discussion. Our opinions are ours to have and discuss, openly if we wish.
I mean that judging someone's family relationship seems off-limits to me unless there has been a crime committed or the family has invited discussion of their business. Here we are judging Gygax as a father and provider for his family - to me to that is crossing a line. We are making a ton of assumptions, his family have not complained about him in this regard, and I don't think it has much bearing on his public legacy. To me, that is very different from exploring the implications of his sexism on D&D, because those weren't just private beliefs, they were sometimes expressed through the game.

It's my opinion that it feels gossipy and not very constructive.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top