D&D 5E Why D&D is not (just) Tolkien

[Caliburn101]

I personally have no doubt about what Gygax said to you, but I seriously take anything the man said with a boulder of salt.

Well I cannot speak to that - he may indeed have been capricious, but I think it unlikely, if strictly, a possibility.

 

[Caliburn101]

Excellent! I can go with my first impression. One that was furthered by your three (3!) posts of increasing, and entertaining umbrage, which amounted to, “How dare someone question or attempt to verify my fantastical statements!”

But for what it's worth, I do find it entertaining that you're playing the "old card" on me. So truly funny. In the future, I'll spare myself the effort of attempting to confirm your statements, as I now know the exact provenance of them.

Getting people to admitting straight out what they really think when they mistakenly believe they have been cleverly obfuscating it in some way is usually more of a challenge through this mode of communication.

So, strictly in this case - you know, the one where you have admitted to calling me a liar - you not only show very poor judgement of character, but you are both easy to read and to expose... by your strokes upon own keyboard no less.

I would stick to such honesty going forwards if I were you. Besides, all that extra typing you have to do to bury your real opinion amongst all the fabricated options... isn't that something of a waste of time?

I wonder how many hours you dedicate to it each week you'd probably like refunded at the end of the your personal saga?

Would you see it all as worth it I wonder?

I realise you are prone to claiming that comments disagreeing with yours as being "fantastical" (I mean who could possibly think to disagree with such a font of all knowledge, right?), but that has no impact on my integrity or the accuracy of my memory. You have conflated doubt with proof - I dare say I know why...

So, might I suggest reserving your doubts in such conversations in future the same way you would if you were saying it live, to someone's face. Unless of course that you just blurt such unfounded, unproven and insulting accusations IN such situations, in which case, I am sure the reactions you get will eventually dissuade you of indulging in such behaviour.


There, you see, I managed to be optimistic for a second.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Parmandur]

Well I cannot speak to that - he may indeed have been capricious, but I think it unlikely, if strictly, a possibility.

Well, thing is, we know when, where, under what conditions and by whom Turn Undead was introduced in the Blackmoor game. So, while I believe you had this conversation with Gygax, he wasn't giving you accurate information. I wouldn't speculate as to his interior state, but being fuzzy on factual points if recollection was a trend with Gygax.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sacrosanct]

It's funny. You always start wanting to believe a person, but only through their conduct, character, and desire to attack everyone instead of discussing the issue can that notion be disabused.

"Personally, I'm getting the impression that you're so caught up in your own self importance and conceit and contempt for anyone you think isn't as smart as you, that you're engaging in the most basic of fallacies, and slinging out accusations that you can't back up." I wish I had said that, but, alas, I didn't.

It’s OK, not everyone can be me

To be honest, my first big red flag was when he said I don’t “have the equipment to” have this debate. Historical literacy might not be my expertise, but I’m not dumb either. That comment was just dripping of pompous contempt. And the second huge red flag was when he said he doesn’t make straw men, right after making one, and implied that only a dumb person would have any interest in going back to prove he made a strawman. Those two flags are what made me say what I did. Then I put him on ignore, so I haven’t read any of the stuff he’s said since, but it sounds like my gut instinct was spot on.

 

[pemerton]

In Dragon 95 (p 12), Gygax says that Bombadil was his favaourite character from LotR:

The Professor drops Tom Bombadil, my personal favorite, like the proverbial hot potato; had he been allowed to enter the action of the books, no fuzzy-footed manling would have been needed to undergo the trials and tribulations of the quest to destroy the Ring. Unfortunately, no character of Bombadil’s power can enter the games, either — for the selfsame reasons!​

The Turning of Undead with 'holy' light (Tom Bombadil was the model for that Cleric ability - I asked Gygax that myself btw).

It seems pretty well documented that clerics, including their power against undead, has its origins in a vampire hunter in Arneson's game.

But at a certain point, the clerical ability was generalised from an anti-vampire power to a general anti-undead power. Who did this?

It seems possible that Bombadil's example of driving away the barrow wights was one of the examples that Gygax had in mind if he was either involved in that design, or going along with its inclusion in the design after it was put forward by someone else (eg Arneson).

When Caliburn101 reports that Gygax described Bomdadil as the model for clerical turning, I don't know how much weight is meant to be placed on those exact words. Perhaps Gygax meant that it was a model, or was one of the exemplars D&D players might draw upon to make sense of the ability within the game, or was something that he, Gygax, had in mind in "allowing" the ability into the game.

 

[Parmandur]

In Dragon 95 (p 12), Gygax says that Bombadil was his favaourite character from LotR:

The Professor drops Tom Bombadil, my personal favorite, like the proverbial hot potato; had he been allowed to enter the action of the books, no fuzzy-footed manling would have been needed to undergo the trials and tribulations of the quest to destroy the Ring. Unfortunately, no character of Bombadil’s power can enter the games, either — for the selfsame reasons!​

It seems pretty well documented that clerics, including their power against undead, has its origins in a vampire hunter in Arneson's game.

But at a certain point, the clerical ability was generalised from an anti-vampire power to a general anti-undead power. Who did this?

It seems possible that Bombadil's example of driving away the barrow wights was one of the examples that Gygax had in mind if he was either involved in that design, or going along with its inclusion in the design after it was put forward by someone else (eg Arneson).

When Caliburn101 reports that Gygax described Bomdadil as the model for clerical turning, I don't know how much weight is meant to be placed on those exact words. Perhaps Gygax meant that it was a model, or was one of the exemplars D&D players might draw upon to make sense of the ability within the game, or was something that he, Gygax, had in mind in "allowing" the ability into the game.

Reasonable post is composed rationally.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*