Ahhh, Reddit. Why do I even bother trying to use it to find answers to anything.
Came across this 'gem' whole looking for something else. https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/120pqt3/misc_gary_gygax_discussion/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/120pqt3/misc_gary_gygax_discussion/)
Quote
Gary Gygax was very good at promoting the idea that Gary Gygax created D&D.
Digging into the origins of the modern roleplaying hobby, it's fairly apparent that Gygax stole enormous amounts of material from Dave Arneson (the creator of Blackmoor) to launch TSR and "create" D&D. This is a matter of public record, as Arneson successfully sued TSR and forced Gygax to put his name on all of the original D&D products. Gygax eventually lost his own company due to his erratic behavior and questionable business choices, then spent much of the remainder of his life spinning the narrative that his company was "stolen" from him by Lorraine Williams, who "ruined" D&D.
Gygax was also notably a bioessentialist (believing that certain traits like creativity or a propensity for violence are "innate" in different races) and a misogynist (rather infamously claiming in a public message board that women can't properly play D&D because their brains aren't built for it).
So what's the verdict? Hard to say. There are now at least two generations of fans out there who have bought into Gygax's own creation myth, but also a fair amount of material to paint him as a pretty problematic and divisive figure in his own time, let alone today.
"Bioessentialist" -- So, someone who has a correct and accurate view of reality. Didn't know Gary was this cool!
Just the latest in line for "we claim this I.P. and want to milk it for money and propaganda purposes, while shitting all over the creator, and demanding everything be changed."
Quote from: Zelen on March 24, 2023, 07:50:43 PM
"Bioessentialist" -- So, someone who has a correct and accurate view of reality. Didn't know Gary was this cool!
Well no, if he defines that term as "believing that certain traits like creativity or a propensity for violence are "innate" in different races" then that's not an accurate view of reality at all. There is nothing "innate" to different races concerning levels of creativity or propensity for violence. Those are human traits which can be influenced by culture and other environmental factors but are not innate to particular races.
That said, I don't think this was a belief of Gygax.
uh... Bioessentialisim makes perfect sense in an imaginary elf game.
Big Jim the minotaur is going to be fucking strong but dumb as a stump. Orcs are evil and will attack and eat humans. yum yum.
Quote from: Mistwell on March 24, 2023, 10:13:35 PM
Quote from: Zelen on March 24, 2023, 07:50:43 PM
"Bioessentialist" -- So, someone who has a correct and accurate view of reality. Didn't know Gary was this cool!
Well no, if he defines that term as "believing that certain traits like creativity or a propensity for violence are "innate" in different races" then that's not an accurate view of reality at all. There is nothing "innate" to different races concerning levels of creativity or propensity for violence. Those are human traits which can be influenced by culture and other environmental factors but are not innate to particular races.
That said, I don't think this was a belief of Gygax.
I assume they mean Orcs, Elves etc when they say Races.
Regarding humans, something like increased average testosterone in a group could easily produce something akin to 'propensity for violence.' Criminals being overwhelmingly male isn't a coincidence, testosterone is a hell of a drug.
But again, I'm sure Gygax was discussing fantasy races, as these loons think saying a Lion-Man would be more prone to violence than a Lamb-Man is 'bio-essentialism.'
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 24, 2023, 08:25:28 PM
Just the latest in line for "we claim this I.P. and want to milk it for money and propaganda purposes, while shitting all over the creator, and demanding everything be changed."
Thus embodying Critical Theory Aesthetic Principle #2: "It is always faster, easier, and more effective to co-opt an existing property and fanbase to your purposes than to go to the trouble of creating and successfully popularizing a new one."
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 24, 2023, 08:25:28 PM
Just the latest in line for "we claim this I.P. and want to milk it for money and propaganda purposes, while shitting all over the creator, and demanding everything be changed."
I read it as:
"I'm a filmmaker, so I need you to give me all the reasons he's an evil white male so I can make sure to do a blurb about that before and after any discussion of his stuff."
These fucking people man. It's just unbelievable.
Quote from: Mistwell on March 24, 2023, 10:13:35 PM
That said, I don't think this was a belief of Gygax.
I don't recall him ever saying anything about real human races.
OTOH the 'race does not exist' trope was only invented in the late '90s afaicr (I remember feeling gobsmacked the first time I heard it in an academic staff seminar ca 2004/5 - I remember saying "Like, how Hispanic isn't really a race? to try to make some sense of it"), so he might have said something 'bioessentialist' at some point in his life. ::)
I am going to say something bigoted: all people with rainbow hair are lunatics.
Now, they're not born with rainbow hair, so I'm not sure we can call it bioessentialist. But it's something-essentialist. As soon as you put in that hair dye, insanity ensues. Usually BPD.
Quote from: S'mon on March 25, 2023, 04:18:20 AM
I don't recall him ever saying anything about real human races.
To my knowledge he didn't, but if someone finds a recording of him doing a Mel Gibson phone rant (conveniently shortly after the invention of vocal AI...), I wouldn't personally care at all, even if I found the content distasteful.
Gary posted on a forum a good definition of lawful good, and he also quoted the "nits make lice" quote. This is, I feel, what almost everyone accusing him of -isms and -ists are using as their primary source. Here's a thread of reddit discussing it a few years ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/dtpgim/gygax_on_lawful_good/
(it includes the actual Gygax post in the OP)
I want to be clear- that statement means that the woke can
never forgive him and that they will
always hate him. If you point out that he's talking about orcs, then they'll think you're silly for not "understanding" that orcs are standing in for some real world group (usually blacks, but, given enough time, they'll find a way to apply it more broadly so everyone that they claim to speak for can drink from the victimization well- whether or not any members of said groups show up.... eh, that's never stopped them before). If you point out that he's communicating that the idea of cause and effect, and that something can be all of sentient, sapient, and not truly able to make good moral choices, are all worth considering in a campaign, they'll shriek 'bioessentialism" and if you are fine with that then they have even more words for you.
Quote from: Venka on March 25, 2023, 04:58:32 AM
Gary posted on a forum a good definition of lawful good, and he also quoted the "nits make lice" quote. This is, I feel, what almost everyone accusing him of -isms and -ists are using as their primary source. Here's a thread of reddit discussing it a few years ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/dtpgim/gygax_on_lawful_good/
(it includes the actual Gygax post in the OP)
Gygax was very enlightened. He even rated Dervishes in the Monster Manual as Lawful Good. ;D
Judging by his quote, two sides can be waging genocidal war on each other (eg Crusaders & Jihadists) and still both be Lawful Good. Which may or may not be a better approach than treating LG as equivalent to 21st century Human Rights discourse, but it is (a) quite interesting and (b) clearly nothing to do with biology.
I don't particularly like it myself since if I use Alignment at all, I generally expect it to mean the sides are broadly
Aligned, like Gondor & Rohan vs Mordor & Saruman.
Quote from: Omega on March 24, 2023, 07:32:44 PM
Ahhh, Reddit. Why do I even bother trying to use it to find answers to anything.
Came across this 'gem' whole looking for something else. https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/120pqt3/misc_gary_gygax_discussion/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/120pqt3/misc_gary_gygax_discussion/)
Quote
Gary Gygax was very good at promoting the idea that Gary Gygax created D&D.
Digging into the origins of the modern roleplaying hobby, it's fairly apparent that Gygax stole enormous amounts of material from Dave Arneson (the creator of Blackmoor) to launch TSR and "create" D&D. This is a matter of public record, as Arneson successfully sued TSR and forced Gygax to put his name on all of the original D&D products. Gygax eventually lost his own company due to his erratic behavior and questionable business choices, then spent much of the remainder of his life spinning the narrative that his company was "stolen" from him by Lorraine Williams, who "ruined" D&D.
Gygax was also notably a bioessentialist (believing that certain traits like creativity or a propensity for violence are "innate" in different races) and a misogynist (rather infamously claiming in a public message board that women can't properly play D&D because their brains aren't built for it).
So what's the verdict? Hard to say. There are now at least two generations of fans out there who have bought into Gygax's own creation myth, but also a fair amount of material to paint him as a pretty problematic and divisive figure in his own time, let alone today.
Ugh... I couldn't resist throwing my 2 cents in there. Mostly a collection of woke, uninformed douchebags as expected. There definitely were a few setting the record straight though.
Oh look, some agenda'd person trotting out these old canards while Gary Con's happening... trolls gotta troll? ::)
I have read all the published works on the "origins of D&D" and as I read that history, the issue of the Arneson vs TSR lawsuit is really a separate one from any accurate analysis of the "truth" in who created the game.
Gygax and the gang back then acted fast and loose without much legal advice, and that contract with Arneson over his royalty fee was easily/reasonably interpreted as giving Arneson rights to ANYTHING derivative of D&D. TSR settled with Arneson because he had a good contractual claim that had a fair chance of succeeding; that is a separate issue from whether Arneson "justifiably" really deserved the credit or the money as the inventor of the game. The Reddit poster quoted by the OP above obviously knows very little about the history of either issue.
Obviously there's that big bad evil forum post Gygax made that SJWs use to make out Gygax is "literally Hitler". But I still give him props for trying things out. Instead of coming up with dogma and confirmation bias, he invited his daughters to play the game. Gave them a fair oportunity to enjoy it and they didn't. So Gygax came up with his opinion based on his actual experience. And really that's all you can ask a decent person to do. He tried something. Found out the result and formed his opinion based on that. The end. He didn't form that opinion out of made up dogma to oppress people nor did he make up a test with moving goal posts for an agenda. But facts and figures are inherently racist and sexist according to some.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron on March 25, 2023, 04:54:38 AM
I am going to say something bigoted: all people with rainbow hair are lunatics.
Now, they're not born with rainbow hair, so I'm not sure we can call it bioessentialist. But it's something-essentialist. As soon as you put in that hair dye, insanity ensues. Usually BPD.
It's more the other way around, if you're mentally ill you're more likely to dye your hair. Also if you're dealing with teens they just want to try something different, haven't experienced it yet. It's more with adults that you're going to see that problem. Among adults I know one Anglophone with dyed hair who isn't nuts. She's definitely left wing, but isn't hostile to those with different beliefs, to the extent of being able to accept that Donald Trump has some good things going for him. But that's just one exception. Non-Anglophones I've seen a lot more sane people with coloured hair.
Quote from: S'mon on March 25, 2023, 04:18:20 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on March 24, 2023, 10:13:35 PM
That said, I don't think this was a belief of Gygax.
OTOH the 'race does not exist' trope was only invented in the late '90s afaicr
It's not a trope, ask this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza)
Long story short, there isn't enough genetic diversity between human ethnicities to justify the use of the term "race" in its usual meaning when talking about human populations.
Culture is another thing, but genetically speaking the differences between human genotypes are insignificant.
Quote from: Vestragor on March 25, 2023, 10:22:19 AM
Quote from: S'mon on March 25, 2023, 04:18:20 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on March 24, 2023, 10:13:35 PM
That said, I don't think this was a belief of Gygax.
OTOH the 'race does not exist' trope was only invented in the late '90s afaicr
It's not a trope, ask this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza)
Long story short, there isn't enough genetic diversity between human ethnicities to justify the use of the term "race" in its usual meaning when talking about human populations. Culture is another thing, but genetically speaking the differences between human genotypes are insignificant.
Different populations have different % of species. Some are 100% homo sapiens (sub-Saharan Africa), others may only be 90% homo sapiens (Pacific Islands) with the other 10% being Neanderthal and Denisovan. I'm not sure it makes sense to say when we're talking about mixed-species that there isn't enough genetic difference to even talk about race.
Quote from: Vestragor on March 25, 2023, 10:22:19 AM
Quote from: S'mon on March 25, 2023, 04:18:20 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on March 24, 2023, 10:13:35 PM
That said, I don't think this was a belief of Gygax.
OTOH the 'race does not exist' trope was only invented in the late '90s afaicr
It's not a trope, ask this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza)
Long story short, there isn't enough genetic diversity between human ethnicities to justify the use of the term "race" in its usual meaning when talking about human populations. Culture is another thing, but genetically speaking the differences between human genotypes are insignificant.
Race is basically social categorization by phenotype (observable physical traits). What counts as a race in a modern sense is dependent upon the society doing the categorizing.
Regardless of its use or lack thereof in real world biology, in terms of RPGs, Race has come to have a standard and useful meaning of "the categories of beings available as player characters" (as distinct from monsters) and "the collection of traits available specific categories of playable beings."
That's a very useful keyword for defining an rpg setting.
In the real world, race is observably real, even if different cultures come to different conclusions about what to make of it. You can just look at genetic distance and draw circles and you'll end up with something that approximates races as they are generally understood (and that genetic distance is far enough to mark different species in the rest of biology). The fact that anyone who brings this up can get cancelled, even Nobel laureates, shows that it's impossible to even have a real discussion about it.
Twitter people recently found this old video and Musk commented on it:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1638728403858898944?cxt=HHwWgIDStaGz970tAAAA
I notice no one is arguing with that guy or people who talk like him, trying to tell them that race isn't real or whatever. He seems to have no problem figuring it out.
Instead of going to have a chat with them, those people hang out on reddit and get mad that the idea of an "elven race" or a "dwarven race" is somehow making a bunch of real statements about the real world- which it actually does not appear to be. In most worlds dwarves can breed with no one except other dwarves, whereas elves, humans, and orcs are some level of cross-fertile. In D&D, "race" has almost always been a word that describes how the members of that fantasy world view different peoples, be it entirely a social construct, entirely biological, or anywhere in between (even in some cases, a difference entirely enforced by magic!). But remember, their viewpoint can't budge an inch- if even a tenth of a percent of race is biological anywhere, even in fiction, it's extremely offensive to them, and they have to fight even a reference to it. That's why they can't actually forgive Gygax, and why, even though the pen and paper gaming community is small and not even remotely a real force in the culture wars, they will continue to attack him.
Now, is it likely that Gygax tried to screw Arneson? Seems real likely! ( https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/473/759/2148159/ )
But I know that people making a big deal out of it may have a political motivation to attack Gygax. Same with almost anything bad said about him. The entire thing seems like a "ah, we've identified something about the past that people we hate like, lets go give one sided accounts to split the community", which is absolutely ubiquitous in everything from television to textbooks to statues.
Gygax
Lawful Neutral Cosmic Entity
Move: 12 or Teleport
Armour Class: 10 Faded Tee Shirt
Hit Dice: 1
Attacks: Acerbic Wit save verses Death
Special Abilities: Dungeon Master`s Discretion because I said so that`s why`functions as a Wish spell once per round
(https://i2.wp.com/www.strangeassembly.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Gary-Gygax-pleasure-to-meet-you.gif?ssl=1)
Greetings!
Gary Gygax was an absolute genius, and also a kind, witty, and generous man. Gygax was intelligent, perceptive, insightful, and fun, and an outstanding gentleman.
Fuck the haters. All of the sobbing, crying, Woke morons should be bathed in napalm.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
It's Reddit, their women have dicks and they can't figure out why can't get pregnant. They can't even slur Gygax properly. I'm just happy that they are playing Gary's game and spreading it far and wide and there is nothing they can do to break that. Short of a leftard figuring out how to create, which they can't because they don't understand the fundamentals of Western society and what the West likes for a story.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 25, 2023, 06:19:22 PM
It's Reddit, their women have dicks and they can't figure out why can't get pregnant. They can't even slur Gygax properly. I'm just happy that they are playing Gary's game and spreading it far and wide and there is nothing they can do to break that. Short of a leftard figuring out how to create, which they can't because they don't understand the fundamentals of Western society and what the West likes for a story.
Guys, can we stick to defending Gygax, or discussing race versus species versus "racism" and not go down the path of just calling people names?
Quote from: GamerforHire on March 25, 2023, 07:07:05 PM
Guys, can we stick to defending Gygax, or discussing race versus species versus "racism" and not go down the path of just calling people names?
Gygax doesn't need defending. Saying he does is buying into the manure that the 'progressive' assholes on reddit are spewing.
Quote from: GamerforHire on March 25, 2023, 07:07:05 PM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 25, 2023, 06:19:22 PM
It's Reddit, their women have dicks and they can't figure out why can't get pregnant. They can't even slur Gygax properly. I'm just happy that they are playing Gary's game and spreading it far and wide and there is nothing they can do to break that. Short of a leftard figuring out how to create, which they can't because they don't understand the fundamentals of Western society and what the West likes for a story.
Guys, can we stick to defending Gygax, or discussing race versus species versus "racism" and not go down the path of just calling people names?
The people doing this, they're leftards. Always have been, always will be. They don't care about the game and they hate you and they hate the West, all of it has got to go. Do not be nice to these people, they will happily put you in a gulag and kill you if they had power, never forget that.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 25, 2023, 06:19:22 PM
Short of a leftard figuring out how to create, which they can't because they don't understand the fundamentals of Western society and what the West likes for a story.
How does it go? "The Shadow that bred them can only mock, it cannot make: not real new things of its own." It's a good line.
Maybe WotC will remove his name from the D&D credits too for 6e.
There was the deliberate mispronunciation of Gary's name at Gencon by the leftard douche for instance I believe last year. My two cents is don't give WotC any money, turn people in your gaming groups against WotC by showing them the deliberate shit they do (thank you Kyle Brink you got two of my players to no longer pay for your content) and move players to other games. Use WotC 5E at your hobby shops as a gateway to introduce players to other games. I normally run a 2 hour adventurers league during the week and on Sundays a 4 hour DCC, the extra time is the incentive to get people off D&D 5E. And we can use Adventurer League scheduling by WotC against them. Make sure to educate your hobby shop if "hey do you guys get the D&D Beyond code, I get that from the Wizards store, no they don't do that for you? I'd like to buy from you but I use D&D Beyond its going to make it hard to buy D&D Books from you".
Essentially, the more disrespectful and censorious leftard WotC becomes, become an anti-consumer and do everything you can in your own means to cause WotC sales.
Quote from: Omega on March 24, 2023, 07:32:44 PM
Digging into the origins of the modern roleplaying hobby, it's fairly apparent that Gygax stole enormous amounts of material from Dave Arneson (the creator of Blackmoor) to launch TSR and "create" D&D.
Except that's not true whatsoever. The first-hand account I got was that Arneson shows up with these "notes" about how he ran his games but they were so sparse and useless that Gygax spent a ton of time fleshing them out. Yeah Arneson was running some sort of RPG, but he didn't write shit. So you have an idea man and a writer/developer. Both names go on D&D because that makes sense. Now Arneson does basically nothing for a couple years except get his royalties and Gygax creates an entire industry. And he still wants his name on the game, which is why it's on the Red Box and not AD&D, mostly because Gygax threw him a bone. Gygax didn't STEAL anything whatsoever. Arneson is 100% fully credited with Blackmoor.
Just typical baseless revisionist history to excoriate that evil white devil. How much longer until someone claims that Arneson had some Sioux Indian playing in his group and that was the TRUE creator? That'll give these retards boners, at least the ones that haven't lopped theirs off yet.
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 09:33:38 AM
Quote from: Omega on March 24, 2023, 07:32:44 PM
Digging into the origins of the modern roleplaying hobby, it's fairly apparent that Gygax stole enormous amounts of material from Dave Arneson (the creator of Blackmoor) to launch TSR and "create" D&D.
Except that's not true whatsoever. The first-hand account I got was that Arneson shows up with these "notes" about how he ran his games but they were so sparse and useless that Gygax spent a ton of time fleshing them out. Yeah Arneson was running some sort of RPG, but he didn't write shit. So you have an idea man and a writer/developer. Both names go on D&D because that makes sense. Now Arneson does basically nothing for a couple years except get his royalties and Gygax creates an entire industry. And he still wants his name on the game, which is why it's on the Red Box and not AD&D, mostly because Gygax threw him a bone. Gygax didn't STEAL anything whatsoever. Arneson is 100% fully credited with Blackmoor.
Just typical baseless revisionist history to excoriate that evil white devil. How much longer until someone claims that Arneson had some Sioux Indian playing in his group and that was the TRUE creator? That'll give these retards boners, at least the ones that haven't lopped theirs off yet.
The core idea for D&D was Arneson not Gygax. Gygax could type so he was able to put out the volume of information needed to build the white box, meanwhile Arneson could not type. The core classes, a lot of mechanics and monsters came from Arneson. It is why Arneson won his case against TSR for when AD&D was released and got royalties.
The "nits make lice" and "slaughter converts after conversion" statements on dragonsfoot are disturbing. Since he cannot defend himself or publicly repent then that's not my problem. He's dead.
Unless he actually did something physically or economically reprehensible, then I don't care. Words are cheap.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 27, 2023, 10:13:05 AM
The "nits make lice" and "slaughter converts after conversion" statements on dragonsfoot are disturbing. Since he cannot defend himself or publicly repent then that's not my problem. He's dead.
Unless he actually did something physically or economically reprehensible, then I don't care. Words are cheap.
Gygax was a historical wargamer, those comments go inline with those games as common parlance. So the leftards can suck their own anus when they complain about. The same leftards are now censoring books wrote 100 years ago because they don't like what was said. If they can't handle history then they can find a nice cliff and jump off it.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 09:55:11 AM
The core idea for D&D was Arneson not Gygax. Gygax could type so he was able to put out the volume of information needed to build the white box, meanwhile Arneson could not type. The core classes, a lot of mechanics and monsters came from Arneson. It is why Arneson won his case against TSR for when AD&D was released and got royalties.
This doesn't refute a single thing I said.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 27, 2023, 10:13:05 AM
The "nits make lice" and "slaughter converts after conversion" statements on dragonsfoot are disturbing.
Why...I need an explanation. The first one is a direct historical quote, the second how things were actually done. Sorry if people are "disturbed" by fucking reality.
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 11:04:46 AM
This doesn't refute a single thing I said.
Replying to myself to make a point: it actually DOES refute what I said, and it's garbage. Is "typing" somehow irrelevant now? If someone shows up with a simple outline (if that) and tells you about this great idea they have, but you spend a ton of time writing it up and producing an actual product, does that mean you didn't do anything? Product development is like 99% of the actual work. I can have the most badass ideas ever, but until I make something tangible it might as well not even exist. This in no way downplays Arneson's contribution to the first release of D&D, but to make it sound like all Gygax did was "type up stuff" is ludicrous. He turned two pages of handwritten notes and a bunch of conversations into a fucking massive industry.
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 11:04:46 AM
Why...I need an explanation. The first one is a direct historical quote, the second how things were actually done. Sorry if people are "disturbed" by fucking reality.
Is there
any evidence for the 'slaughter converts after conversion' thing? Because I've heard it as a legend, and Gygax seems to have been using it as more of a thought experiment for 'here's what Lawful Good could be under certain circumstances'--again, Gygax's definitions of Good and Evil seem to have been heavy on divine command ethics. I don't know that it's ever been documented as "how things were actually done."
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 11:12:41 AM
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 11:04:46 AM
This doesn't refute a single thing I said.
Replying to myself to make a point: it actually DOES refute what I said, and it's garbage. Is "typing" somehow irrelevant now? If someone shows up with a simple outline (if that) and tells you about this great idea they have, but you spend a ton of time writing it up and producing an actual product, does that mean you didn't do anything? Product development is like 99% of the actual work. I can have the most badass ideas ever, but until I make something tangible it might as well not even exist. This in no way downplays Arneson's contribution to the first release of D&D, but to make it sound like all Gygax did was "type up stuff" is ludicrous. He turned two pages of handwritten notes and a bunch of conversations into a fucking massive industry.
Dude, a court of law stated Arneson was deserved royalties from AD&D. You can open up the 3.5 DMG Core Ruelbook II and see Gary Gygax and Arneson credited as co-creators of the game.
This is the court case in which Gygax lost in the court of law and was required to pay Arneson royalties. The US court system did not consider Arneson's complaint garbage and neither do I. If you haven't read up on the history of D&D you might want to spend some time on it. D&D is Arneson's game and Gygax came in after playing it and adopted Arneson's campaign and ideas to help create the white box. When you look at Basic D&D much of that is what Arneson was playing. Gygax could type and helped organize and create some of the content himself. But no, D&D was not exclusively Gygax's own work, everyone knows that. You could list much of AD&D's non- basic content as Gygax's because Arneson didn't create that portion however the core concept was Arneson's not Gygax's.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/473/759/2148159/
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 27, 2023, 11:45:17 AM
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 11:04:46 AM
Why...I need an explanation. The first one is a direct historical quote, the second how things were actually done. Sorry if people are "disturbed" by fucking reality.
Is there any evidence for the 'slaughter converts after conversion' thing? Because I've heard it as a legend, and Gygax seems to have been using it as more of a thought experiment for 'here's what Lawful Good could be under certain circumstances'--again, Gygax's definitions of Good and Evil seem to have been heavy on divine command ethics. I don't know that it's ever been documented as "how things were actually done."
It's a great big fat nothing burger with leftard sauce on tope. You can read it here. Gygax uses that phrase in place of genocide. The leftards bitching about it are the same leftards who bitch about how capitalism caused them to have piles and why its unfair they can't live in mansions and do no work. They are idiots who should be made fun of.
https://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11762&start=77
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 27, 2023, 10:13:05 AM
The "nits make lice" and "slaughter converts after conversion" statements on dragonsfoot are disturbing.
I don't find them disturbing at all. So I wouldn't say the are objectively disturbing- Gygax obviously didn't think so either. Certainly, some might be disturbed by them, but to make that as an objective statement? I strongly disagree.
Quote from: Venka on March 27, 2023, 12:48:44 PM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 27, 2023, 10:13:05 AM
The "nits make lice" and "slaughter converts after conversion" statements on dragonsfoot are disturbing.
I don't find them disturbing at all. So I wouldn't say the are objectively disturbing- Gygax obviously didn't think so either. Certainly, some might be disturbed by them, but to make that as an objective statement? I strongly disagree.
It's much ado about nothing. He used the nits phrase in place of genocide, thats all.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 12:35:03 PM
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/473/759/2148159/
So what? The court thought Arneson deserved royalties because he came up with most of the original concept? I never disputed that whatsoever, I SPECIFICALLY STATED Gygax was the one who developed that concept into an industry. This would be like if some dude originally drew Mickey Mouse on a napkin then Disney turned him into a cartoon and trillion dollar company, but you want to insist they did the same amount of work because, you know, reasons. Yeah, original dude might get some royalties, but so what? Royalties in no way imply the amount of work put into a product. Take a look at the record industry...musicians showing up at a label with pretty much everything done and some "producer" gets massive royalties because he flipped a switch and turned on the microphones. There are a lot more Colonel Parkers than Phil Spectors...to extend the music analogy, Arneson shows up to the studio with the idea of a concept album, Gygax played all the instruments, recorded it, produced the albums, and setup distribution and sales. You're gonna probably get royalties from the court in that instance, but the reality is you didn't "design" shit.
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 01:09:47 PM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 12:35:03 PM
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/473/759/2148159/
So what? The court thought Arneson deserved royalties because he came up with most of the original concept? I never disputed that whatsoever, I SPECIFICALLY STATED Gygax was the one who developed that concept into an industry. This would be like if some dude originally drew Mickey Mouse on a napkin then Disney turned him into a cartoon and trillion dollar company, but you want to insist they did the same amount of work because, you know, reasons. Yeah, original dude might get some royalties, but so what? Royalties in no way imply the amount of work put into a product. Take a look at the record industry...musicians showing up at a label with pretty much everything done and some "producer" gets massive royalties because he flipped a switch and turned on the microphones. There are a lot more Colonel Parkers than Phil Spectors...to extend the music analogy, Arneson shows up to the studio with the idea of a concept album, Gygax played all the instruments, recorded it, produced the albums, and setup distribution and sales. You're gonna probably get royalties from the court in that instance, but the reality is you didn't "design" shit.
To each their own, I'll go with the court case and TSR and WOTC take that lists Arneson and Gygax as co-creators of D&D and you can do whatever you want to do.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 01:13:19 PM
To each their own, I'll go with the court case and TSR and WOTC take that lists Arneson and Gygax as co-creators of D&D and you can do whatever you want to do.
You're totally missing the point...
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 01:13:19 PM
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 01:09:47 PM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 12:35:03 PM
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/473/759/2148159/
So what? The court thought Arneson deserved royalties because he came up with most of the original concept? I never disputed that whatsoever, I SPECIFICALLY STATED Gygax was the one who developed that concept into an industry. This would be like if some dude originally drew Mickey Mouse on a napkin then Disney turned him into a cartoon and trillion dollar company, but you want to insist they did the same amount of work because, you know, reasons. Yeah, original dude might get some royalties, but so what? Royalties in no way imply the amount of work put into a product. Take a look at the record industry...musicians showing up at a label with pretty much everything done and some "producer" gets massive royalties because he flipped a switch and turned on the microphones. There are a lot more Colonel Parkers than Phil Spectors...to extend the music analogy, Arneson shows up to the studio with the idea of a concept album, Gygax played all the instruments, recorded it, produced the albums, and setup distribution and sales. You're gonna probably get royalties from the court in that instance, but the reality is you didn't "design" shit.
To each their own, I'll go with the court case and TSR and WOTC take that lists Arneson and Gygax as co-creators of D&D and you can do whatever you want to do.
Go read the various histories of Arneson and Gygax. This has all been hashed out fairly well. The lawsuit went off on the written contracts between them, not on an analysis of Arneson's notes versus Gary's typing or interpretations, etc. The whole notes vs typing thing underlay those contracts, and was part of the background—and in legalese would have been discussed as to whether there was "consideration" for the written contracts.
No one can really say—and Jon Peterson makes this point—where Arneson's notes begin and end, what was Gary's own ideas, and what was the fruit of the frequent conversations *between* Arneson and Gary. People always forget that these two had ample correspondence and live conversations, and simply reducing the debate to notes versus typing is not accurate.
One last point—this one legal opinion people keep posting links to is NOT, I repeat NOT, a determination on the royalty rights. It is a court opinion on Gary's attempt to dismiss the case that was originally filed in Minnesota federal court on the grounds that Gary could not be sued there, and the court denied this motion on the grounds that Gary had enough "contacts" with the state of Minnesota to be sued there. It is NOT an opinion on the merits of the case.
doubled
Dude I get the point, gygax could type and organize into a book and arneson built the actual game that people played. Gygax copied it, and he could type, welcome to the white box. Next for Advanced D&D, Gygax wasn't able to come up with enough new concepts in the game that TSR had to pay royalties to Arneson. Whereas WotC was able to come up with a new game where Gygax and Arneson lost royalty claims. It doesn't mean Gygax didn't contribute anything creatively to D&D, it means D&D wasn't created solely by Gygax, it was Gygax and Arneson.
You didn't convince me in the least. The vast majority of people consider Arneson and Gygax as creators of D&D. You can believe whatever you want bless your heart. I believe what I read, what I see, legal case, and historical record over you. I'm sorry you are not an authoritative source. Your opinion stinks and I doubt any one would use it as a footnote on this issue.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 02:19:57 PM
Dude I get the point, gygax could type and organize into a book and arneson built the actual game that people played. Gygax copied it, and he could type, welcome to the white box. Next for Advanced D&D, Gygax wasn't able to come up with enough new concepts in the game that TSR had to pay royalties to Arneson. Whereas WotC was able to come up with a new game where Gygax and Arneson lost royalty claims. It doesn't mean Gygax didn't contribute anything creatively to D&D, it means D&D wasn't created solely by Gygax, it was Gygax and Arneson.
You didn't convince me in the least. The vast majority of people consider Arneson and Gygax as creators of D&D. You can believe whatever you want bless your heart. I believe what I read, what I see, legal case, and historical record over you. I'm sorry you are not an authoritative source. Your opinion stinks and I doubt any one would use it as a footnote on this issue.
Who are you speaking/referring to? The earlier posters you were debating or my last post, or both? You say "your opinion stinks" but isn't clear at all which poster you are referring to, or which statement of opinion you are referring to.
I know my opinion is based on having read everything by Jon Peterson, as well as hearing him on about four or five different interviews, reading Ben Riggs book, and reading the biography of Gygax and the multi-volume history of tabletop rpgs. I also actually read the legal opinion that keeps getting linked to, and as a lawyer of 25 years I can read such opinions with at least a little competence and authority.
Again, I have stated two different things—(1) that the record is confused on just how to apportion credit between Arneson and Gygax, an opinion voiced by Peterson and most everyone else; and (2) that the lawsuit was based on the contracts (referred to in the legal opinion as "royalty agreements") between Gygax/TSR and Arneson, not on the underlying facts themselves of sorting out who was responsible for what. If you read the opinion, or have read Peterson's work on this, the second opinion is incontrovertible. People obviously have differing opinions on the first issue.
That Reddit thread gave me brain damage. People arguing based on 2nd and 3rd hand info. Hearsay is not admissible in court for a reason.
As for arguing over who created more of D&D, Arneson or Gygax? I can't imagine a bigger waste of time. We wouldn't have D&D without both of them. We would certainly have TTRPGs, since it was in the air at the time, but the history would be vastly different.
Quote from: GamerforHire on March 27, 2023, 02:56:53 PM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 02:19:57 PM
Dude I get the point, gygax could type and organize into a book and arneson built the actual game that people played. Gygax copied it, and he could type, welcome to the white box. Next for Advanced D&D, Gygax wasn't able to come up with enough new concepts in the game that TSR had to pay royalties to Arneson. Whereas WotC was able to come up with a new game where Gygax and Arneson lost royalty claims. It doesn't mean Gygax didn't contribute anything creatively to D&D, it means D&D wasn't created solely by Gygax, it was Gygax and Arneson.
You didn't convince me in the least. The vast majority of people consider Arneson and Gygax as creators of D&D. You can believe whatever you want bless your heart. I believe what I read, what I see, legal case, and historical record over you. I'm sorry you are not an authoritative source. Your opinion stinks and I doubt any one would use it as a footnote on this issue.
Who are you speaking/referring to? The earlier posters you were debating or my last post, or both? You say "your opinion stinks" but isn't clear at all which poster you are referring to, or which statement of opinion you are referring to.
I know my opinion is based on having read everything by Jon Peterson, as well as hearing him on about four or five different interviews, reading Ben Riggs book, and reading the biography of Gygax and the multi-volume history of tabletop rpgs. I also actually read the legal opinion that keeps getting linked to, and as a lawyer of 25 years I can read such opinions with at least a little competence and authority.
Again, I have stated two different things—(1) that the record is confused on just how to apportion credit between Arneson and Gygax, an opinion voiced by Peterson and most everyone else; and (2) that the lawsuit was based on the contracts (referred to in the legal opinion as "royalty agreements") between Gygax/TSR and Arneson, not on the underlying facts themselves of sorting out who was responsible for what. If you read the opinion, or have read Peterson's work on this, the second opinion is incontrovertible. People obviously have differing opinions on the first issue.
its not you the other guy, the quoting on this site ain't great man.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 02:19:57 PM
You didn't convince me in the least.
So?
QuoteThe vast majority of people consider Arneson and Gygax as creators of D&D.
Did I dispute this? At all? You have poor reading comprehension skills if you believe so.
QuoteYou can believe whatever you want bless your heart. I believe what I read, what I see, legal case, and historical record over you. I'm sorry you are not an authoritative source. Your opinion stinks and I doubt any one would use it as a footnote on this issue.
Except it bears out based on all the evidence, not purely a single court case that granted royalties. You SURE You really shouldn't just be posting over on reddit?
EDIT: I actually had to go back and re-read all your replies...I think you have fucking brain damage. You're trying to argue that Gygax didn't do anything but type up Arneson's notes, I guess? I don't even know.
Arneson adapted Chainmail from Gygax and created a brand new genre called RPG. Yes/No?
Gygax took Arnesons game, typed it out and added some of his own stuff to make the White Box. Yes/No?
Without Arneson there is no D&D, do you understand that? What Gygax would have been doing is putting out wargame material for Guidon Games, do you understand that Yes/No?
The plurality of content for the White Box was Arneson, for the first Basic Edition one could argue how much was Gygax and how much Arneson that Holmes used, however giving it a split is more than likely the outcome Yes/No?
QuoteIt doesn't mean Gygax didn't contribute anything creatively to D&D, it means D&D wasn't created solely by Gygax, it was Gygax and Arneson.
The thing here on this thread, you just want to argue. What's wrong today, you get fired, mom kick you out of the home or you just want to be a miserable cur. I never said Gygax didn't contribute to D&D, I said quite clearly and concisely that both Gygax and Arneson are the creators of D&D.
Quote from: Venka on March 27, 2023, 12:48:44 PM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 27, 2023, 10:13:05 AM
The "nits make lice" and "slaughter converts after conversion" statements on dragonsfoot are disturbing.
I don't find them disturbing at all. So I wouldn't say the are objectively disturbing- Gygax obviously didn't think so either. Certainly, some might be disturbed by them, but to make that as an objective statement? I strongly disagree.
Greetings!
"KILL THEM ALL. LET GOD SORT THEM OUT!"
All the crying pussies. Shrieking about Gygax talking about stuff. Gygax was right! There's nothing disturbing about anything that Gygax said. Some people have difficulties separating a game from reality, apparently. *Laughing*
I agree Venka!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I have a bunch of thoughts on this.
Gygax had the ability to take ideas from other people and make them into useful products. He did it with Chainmail. He did it with Alexander the Great. He did it with Dungeons & Dragons. I think he did it with Boot Hill. Probably many others. He could look at an idea and think, "yeah, it's a start but I can make it better." That's not an easy thing to do, particularly when you are creating something that no one else has created before.
Arneson had the idea, but it was also based on previous ideas he saw from David Wesely. He took a collaborative experience and put some structure to it and made a campaign out of it. And played it for a year or more before Gygax even heard of it. But Arneson could never really develop it. I understand that because I have yellow pads full of cool ideas or scenarios I have run but nothing developed into a marketable product. Arneson wasn't into promotion, but Gygax was.
Gygax took the things he improved and told folks about it. He wrote articles for magazines. He engaged in discussion about the things he worked on and tried to generate enthusiasm. He organized conventions and groups of people to channel their energies into support of products he liked. Gygax was a natural promoter.
It frustrates me that we spend so much time arguing about who made what. Arneson gave Gygax pages of notes, probably mostly tables and stuff which wasn't really fleshed out but was complete enough for him to run his campaign. Gygax wanted something that could be sold to folks who had never experienced Arneson in action, so he connected the dots and added mechanics where needed and made the product something which could be sold to others. D&D would never have happened without the collaboration of the two. How much did Arneson contribute? Dunno, but some sources say 18 or more pages, which (considering the layout of the OD&D books) might have been between a quarter to a half of the original product. How much did Gygax contribute? Dunno, but probably the rest of the product, although playtesting with others like Rob Kuntz were happening and we'll never know how much they might have contributed as well.
Collaboration is like that. Look at the history of science and you'll see lots of Laws named after individuals, but if you dig deep you find that great scientists often corresponded and gave each other ideas but the credit was ultimately assigned to one of them. Beyond a certain point, the "who did what" argument is pointless because we'll never really get to the answer because most of the folks involved have already passed. We will never really know. Court documents don't really answer the question, either. We know that Gygax shared credit for OD&D, then tried not to share credit for AD&D. In his mind, at least, there was enough of a difference in the games (or the contribution) to merit a change. I'm no lawyer, but I understand that court rulings often come down to proof and not "right" versus "wrong" in an issue.
I know that a lot of my opinions from the 1970's were based on (and biased by) statements made by Gygax because he had Dragon and he had TSR and he wrote stuff. Arneson did an occasional interview but otherwise said little. Bottom line is that neither gentleman is with us to advance his own cause or answer questions. I don't see that us arguing about it will gain anything because each side can only advance their cause by bashing the other side, and instead of arriving at an answer we just circle the same questions again and again. And none of us were actually there.
Quote from: finarvyn on March 27, 2023, 04:26:45 PM
He could look at an idea and think, "yeah, it's a start but I can make it better." That's not an easy thing to do, particularly when you are creating something that no one else has created before.
Not Cyborg Commando. There was no Wizard spell that could fix that ;D
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 04:17:26 PM
Arneson adapted Chainmail from Gygax and created a brand new genre called RPG. Yes/No?
Gygax took Arnesons game, typed it out and added some of his own stuff to make the White Box. Yes/No?
Without Arneson there is no D&D, do you understand that? What Gygax would have been doing is putting out wargame material for Guidon Games, do you understand that Yes/No?
The plurality of content for the White Box was Arneson, for the first Basic Edition one could argue how much was Gygax and how much Arneson that Holmes used, however giving it a split is more than likely the outcome Yes/No?
QuoteIt doesn't mean Gygax didn't contribute anything creatively to D&D, it means D&D wasn't created solely by Gygax, it was Gygax and Arneson.
The thing here on this thread, you just want to argue. What's wrong today, you get fired, mom kick you out of the home or you just want to be a miserable cur. I never said Gygax didn't contribute to D&D, I said quite clearly and concisely that both Gygax and Arneson are the creators of D&D.
Okay, I think you're actually retarded. Carry on.
Quote from: GhostNinja on March 27, 2023, 04:52:10 PM
Not Cyborg Commando. There was no Wizard spell that could fix that ;D
I got a copy of that out of curiosity...how it got published is beyond me. I guess name recognition goes a long way.
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 05:54:44 PM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 04:17:26 PM
Arneson adapted Chainmail from Gygax and created a brand new genre called RPG. Yes/No?
Gygax took Arnesons game, typed it out and added some of his own stuff to make the White Box. Yes/No?
Without Arneson there is no D&D, do you understand that? What Gygax would have been doing is putting out wargame material for Guidon Games, do you understand that Yes/No?
The plurality of content for the White Box was Arneson, for the first Basic Edition one could argue how much was Gygax and how much Arneson that Holmes used, however giving it a split is more than likely the outcome Yes/No?
QuoteIt doesn't mean Gygax didn't contribute anything creatively to D&D, it means D&D wasn't created solely by Gygax, it was Gygax and Arneson.
The thing here on this thread, you just want to argue. What's wrong today, you get fired, mom kick you out of the home or you just want to be a miserable cur. I never said Gygax didn't contribute to D&D, I said quite clearly and concisely that both Gygax and Arneson are the creators of D&D.
Okay, I think you're actually retarded. Carry on.
Quote from: GhostNinja on March 27, 2023, 04:52:10 PM
Not Cyborg Commando. There was no Wizard spell that could fix that ;D
I got a copy of that out of curiosity...how it got published is beyond me. I guess name recognition goes a long way.
Well son you don't have reading comprehension, I'm done with you.
Quote from: finarvyn on March 27, 2023, 04:26:45 PM
I have a bunch of thoughts on this.
Crazy talk! Crazy! ;)
Jokes aside, these accusations from the OP are all old as dirt, as you know. Any informed, rational assessment of them dispels them, but some people just aren't interested. Anyway, hope you are well, Fin. Take care!
This all reminds me of the "Stan Lee was a hack that stole everything from Jack Kirby" horseshit that's become popular with midwits for the last decade or two.
Kirby was a talented guy, but he was a blue collar guy, always taking the short money. Yeah Lee over-worked Kirby and paid him peanuts, but historically that's how publishing houses treated writers and artists. Famous writers like Lovecraft and Howard cranked out stories just to make rent. Kirby was also famous for taking cash in hand over royalties.
What did Lee do? He built a brand. The guy was a relentless promoter, and turned Marvel in to a respected company, with T.V. deals and character recognition.
Stripping Gygax from the legacy of D&D because he allegedly did the same to Arneson makes zero sense, and is only suggested by cultural wreckers that want to tear down every pillar of Western civilization, no matter how minor. If Gygax was an Inuit Lesbian who'd swiped 99% of D&D from Arneson, these same types would fight tooth and claw to prop up said legacy.
TLDR: people can be shitty, and still do amazing things, worthy of recognition.
Quote from: Brad on March 27, 2023, 05:54:44 PM
I got a copy of that out of curiosity...how it got published is beyond me. I guess name recognition goes a long way.
I got it new when it first came out (Yep I have been gaming that long). I to this day don't think Cyborg Commando is actually playable. I could be wrong.
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 27, 2023, 11:03:52 PM
This all reminds me of the "Stan Lee was a hack that stole everything from Jack Kirby" horseshit that's become popular with midwits for the last decade or two.
Kirby was a talented guy, but he was a blue collar guy, always taking the short money. Yeah Lee over-worked Kirby and paid him peanuts, but historically that's how publishing houses treated writers and artists. Famous writers like Lovecraft and Howard cranked out stories just to make rent. Kirby was also famous for taking cash in hand over royalties.
What did Lee do? He built a brand. The guy was a relentless promoter, and turned Marvel in to a respected company, with T.V. deals and character recognition.
Stripping Gygax from the legacy of D&D because he allegedly did the same to Arneson makes zero sense, and is only suggested by cultural wreckers that want to tear down every pillar of Western civilization, no matter how minor. If Gygax was an Inuit Lesbian who'd swiped 99% of D&D from Arneson, these same types would fight tooth and claw to prop up said legacy.
TLDR: people can be shitty, and still do amazing things, worthy of recognition.
Arneson and Gygax both created D&D with a greater portion of the white box being due to Arneson and then as the product line progressed it was more Gygax than Arneson. But, without Arneson, there never would have been a D&D in the first place. And likely without Gygax the white box wouldn't have been made in the first place. Gygax had no idea of the RPG till he played with Arneson and was introduced to the concept. Arneson wasn't able to type well, the one manuscript he attempted was unusable. For some reason, people think Gygax created D&D all by himself, it gets old. If it wasn't for Arneson, its likely Gygax would have continued in historical combat miniature games.
It gets old when people try to single out Gygax as the creator, he wasn't, he was the co-creator with Arneson.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PM
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 27, 2023, 11:03:52 PM
This all reminds me of the "Stan Lee was a hack that stole everything from Jack Kirby" horseshit that's become popular with midwits for the last decade or two.
Kirby was a talented guy, but he was a blue collar guy, always taking the short money. Yeah Lee over-worked Kirby and paid him peanuts, but historically that's how publishing houses treated writers and artists. Famous writers like Lovecraft and Howard cranked out stories just to make rent. Kirby was also famous for taking cash in hand over royalties.
What did Lee do? He built a brand. The guy was a relentless promoter, and turned Marvel in to a respected company, with T.V. deals and character recognition.
Stripping Gygax from the legacy of D&D because he allegedly did the same to Arneson makes zero sense, and is only suggested by cultural wreckers that want to tear down every pillar of Western civilization, no matter how minor. If Gygax was an Inuit Lesbian who'd swiped 99% of D&D from Arneson, these same types would fight tooth and claw to prop up said legacy.
TLDR: people can be shitty, and still do amazing things, worthy of recognition.
Arneson and Gygax both created D&D with a greater portion of the white box being due to Arneson and then as the product line progressed it was more Gygax than Arneson. But, without Arneson, there never would have been a D&D in the first place. And likely without Gygax the white box wouldn't have been made in the first place. Gygax had no idea of the RPG till he played with Arneson and was introduced to the concept. Arneson wasn't able to type well, the one manuscript he attempted was unusable. For some reason, people think Gygax created D&D all by himself, it gets old. If it wasn't for Arneson, its likely Gygax would have continued in historical combat miniature games.
It gets old when people try to single out Gygax as the creator, he wasn't, he was the co-creator with Arneson.
When a pair create something, it's usual for one to be remembered, and the other forgotten. Usually the one who does the interviews and schmoozing is remembered, but sometimes it's as simple as having a memorable name. Gygax is a name that sticks in the memory.
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 27, 2023, 11:33:55 PM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PM
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 27, 2023, 11:03:52 PM
This all reminds me of the "Stan Lee was a hack that stole everything from Jack Kirby" horseshit that's become popular with midwits for the last decade or two.
Kirby was a talented guy, but he was a blue collar guy, always taking the short money. Yeah Lee over-worked Kirby and paid him peanuts, but historically that's how publishing houses treated writers and artists. Famous writers like Lovecraft and Howard cranked out stories just to make rent. Kirby was also famous for taking cash in hand over royalties.
What did Lee do? He built a brand. The guy was a relentless promoter, and turned Marvel in to a respected company, with T.V. deals and character recognition.
Stripping Gygax from the legacy of D&D because he allegedly did the same to Arneson makes zero sense, and is only suggested by cultural wreckers that want to tear down every pillar of Western civilization, no matter how minor. If Gygax was an Inuit Lesbian who'd swiped 99% of D&D from Arneson, these same types would fight tooth and claw to prop up said legacy.
TLDR: people can be shitty, and still do amazing things, worthy of recognition.
Arneson and Gygax both created D&D with a greater portion of the white box being due to Arneson and then as the product line progressed it was more Gygax than Arneson. But, without Arneson, there never would have been a D&D in the first place. And likely without Gygax the white box wouldn't have been made in the first place. Gygax had no idea of the RPG till he played with Arneson and was introduced to the concept. Arneson wasn't able to type well, the one manuscript he attempted was unusable. For some reason, people think Gygax created D&D all by himself, it gets old. If it wasn't for Arneson, its likely Gygax would have continued in historical combat miniature games.
It gets old when people try to single out Gygax as the creator, he wasn't, he was the co-creator with Arneson.
When a pair create something, it's usual for one to be remembered, and the other forgotten. Usually the one who does the interviews and schmoozing is remembered, but sometimes it's as simple as having a memorable name. Gygax is a name that sticks in the memory.
Well gygax would have been a great product manager but he made a horrible CEO. Its a possibility if he was more CEO, that D&D would still be in the Midwest and still putting a game that appeals to everyone and not aimed towards Seattle for everything. I'm just waiting for a D&D Module to put in a starbucks and cellphones next.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 28, 2023, 02:26:04 AM
I'm just waiting for a D&D Module to put in a starbucks and cellphones next.
They did actually publish an adventure where you play baristas in a fantasy Starbucks.
Quote from: S'mon on March 28, 2023, 02:37:12 AM
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 28, 2023, 02:26:04 AM
I'm just waiting for a D&D Module to put in a starbucks and cellphones next.
They did actually publish an adventure where you play baristas in a fantasy Starbucks.
Yeah, and that J. Scott Garibay guy gushed over it...enough said.
Quote from: GhostNinja on March 27, 2023, 04:52:10 PM
Quote from: finarvyn on March 27, 2023, 04:26:45 PM
He could look at an idea and think, "yeah, it's a start but I can make it better." That's not an easy thing to do, particularly when you are creating something that no one else has created before.
Not Cyborg Commando. There was no Wizard spell that could fix that ;D
Well, that's sort of a "drop the mic" moment. You win. 8)
Is there another court decision to the 25 July 1979 motion dismissal being linked in this discussion? Because that judgment finds that Gygax had sufficient contact with Minnesota for Arneson to sue him there. Consequently, Gygax's motion for forum non conveniens would be dismissed. This is pretty normal court fare in early stage litigation. I understood there was a more substantial judgment that led TSR to settle for 2.5% with DA, or is this it? If there is more could someone direct me to a link?
Quote from: El-V on March 28, 2023, 01:29:34 PM
Is there another court decision to the 25 July 1979 motion dismissal being linked in this discussion? Because that judgment finds that Gygax had sufficient contact with Minnesota for Arneson to sue him there. Consequently, Gygax's motion for forum non conveniens would be dismissed. This is pretty normal court fare in early stage litigation. I understood there was a more substantial judgment that led TSR to settle for 2.5% with DA, or is this it? If there is more could someone direct me to a link?
The suit against Gygax was settled out of court after Gygax's motion for summary judgement failed. That's fairly standard legal faire and the settlement doesn't necessarily indicate fault. Gygax could have just decided that the cost of litigating wasn't worth it compared to coming to a settlement with Arneson. It should also be noted that Arneson was not contesting that Gygax created D&D, just whether Gygax was the
sole creator.
Arneson filed multiple claims though, both against Gygax and TSR. The TSR suit revolved around whether Arneson was owed royalties for AD&D, based on the settlement with Gygax, and resolved in 1985 mostly in Arneson's favor. Unfortunately, I can't find a link to the case that doesn't require a Lexis/Westlaw subscription, but you can look up "Arneson v. TSR Hobbies, Inc Civil No. 4-84-1180" and see if you have better luck than me.
I don't care about this lawsuit stuff. I also don't care for ignorant people who will read fewer books in their entire life than Gygax read before he created D&D, you know, the kind of people who lack curiosity, imagination, and haven't learned anything new since high school. I think all of the smearing of Gygax has to do with a stallinist attempt to erase the past of D&D in order to control and shape the future of D&D in their own demented vision.
Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on March 24, 2023, 11:03:21 PM
uh... Bioessentialisim makes perfect sense in an imaginary elf game.
Big Jim the minotaur is going to be fucking strong but dumb as a stump. Orcs are evil and will attack and eat humans. yum yum.
and black, you cannot forget Orcs are 100% always and forever represented as a standin for black people and not mindless killing machines out of ancient folklore.
Quote from: THE_Leopold on March 29, 2023, 10:14:32 AM
Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on March 24, 2023, 11:03:21 PM
uh... Bioessentialisim makes perfect sense in an imaginary elf game.
Big Jim the minotaur is going to be fucking strong but dumb as a stump. Orcs are evil and will attack and eat humans. yum yum.
and black, you cannot forget Orcs are 100% always and forever represented as a standin for black people and not mindless killing machines out of ancient folklore.
My Orcs are basically Western Roman Imperial Remnant Loyalists seeking to impose tyrannical order on a setting that is basically AD 600 Western Europe (i.e. a bunch of independent breakaway realms seeking to rule themselves)... i.e. the classic Lawful Evil orcs before they got Warcrafted into bands of noble savages.
My orcs are rapacious destroyers of civilized society looking to absorb and destroy everything. Essentially, the standard plot device to give the party an excuse to beat up the bad guys and save the town.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PM
Arneson and Gygax both created D&D with a greater portion of the white box being due to Arneson and then as the product line progressed it was more Gygax than Arneson.
That is not accurate. The rules of the 3 LBBs were largely the work of Gary Gygax. The majority of accounts by his players paint Dave as a "seat of his pants" referee who was very creative and had lots of fun. But his rules were basically notes, charts, aides, and mnemonics to use as a reference and to help Dave remain consistent. More important accounts and interviews from back in the day make clear that the rules that were used to run Blackmoor were not the D&D rules that were released in 1974. Although Dave did switch to using those rules after publications.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PM
But, without Arneson, there never would have been a D&D in the first place.
Also true. While Dave didn't invent D&D, he did invent tabletop roleplaying. Not from scratch but he was the guy who put together the pieces and put in the sweat to make a campaign that we would recognize as tabletop roleplaying today.
Dave main role was to teach Gary how to run a tabletop roleplaying campaign as well as reviewing Gygax's work. D&D was a collaboration of Gary and Dave but not in the sense that Gygax adapted Dave's rules but more like Dave was Gygax's experienced mentor and helping him flesh out the D&D rules based on his experience.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PMAnd likely without Gygax the white box wouldn't have been made in the first place.
Or a written set of RPG rules in the first place. Without Gygax, likely tabletop roleplaying campaign would be just one more way of running a sophisticated miniature wargame campaign.
More important without Gygax the dungeon adventure wouldn't have had the prominence it did. It was just luck that when asked to demonstrate Blackmoor for the Lake Geneva group, the most portable part of it was the Blackmoor Dungeon. It would have likely been a different outcome if the Lake Geneva group instead headed up to Minneapolis to play the demo.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PM
Arneson wasn't able to type well, the one manuscript he attempted was unusable. For some reason, people think Gygax created D&D all by himself, it gets old. If it wasn't for Arneson, its likely Gygax would have continued in historical combat miniature games..
Again the thing is that the rules Dave used at the time was not even a prototype of the D&D rules that Gygax wrote as first "Fantasy Game" draft.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 11:27:33 PM
It gets old when people try to single out Gygax as the creator, he wasn't, he was the co-creator with Arneson.
My opinion is that Gygax invented D&D, Arneson invented tabletop roleplaying. And there is no alternate history path to our present-day hobby that doesn't run through the two of them.
And I find it remarkable that we had two moments of creative genius in succession that resulted in our hobby. And the two complemented so well despite the later fallout between the two.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 27, 2023, 06:25:54 PM
Well son you don't have reading comprehension, I'm done with you.
I have no idea what axe you have to grind with Gary Gygax, but you're demonstrably incorrect about ever assertion you've made in this thread. Not to mention you literally cannot read.
Quote from: Brad on March 29, 2023, 12:26:24 PM
I have no idea what axe you have to grind with Gary Gygax, but you're demonstrably incorrect about ever assertion you've made in this thread. Not to mention you literally cannot read.
I'm glad that Gary and Dave created D&D, because it spawned the hobby that has given me joy and has helped me meet new friends for many years.
Quote from: Grognard GM on March 24, 2023, 08:25:28 PM
Just the latest in line for "we claim this I.P. and want to milk it for money and propaganda purposes, while shitting all over the creator, and demanding everything be changed."
Yep. At this rate I'll live to see him denounced in the pages of a game that he named and is in the credits for prior editions. The virtue signal will be a full page and the first one realized, as Evil Hat did with their "Lovecraft is a racist but we want the money his fans have" FATE game they put out.
I guess another question we have to ask ourselves is this:
Are those people on Reddit actually gamers who are actively playing or are they just idiots arguing about a game they have never read or play
If they are not actively playing or reading D&D or other games, why do we care what they think?
Since Gary Gygax was addressing me in that discussion thread from 2005, I'd like to point out a couple of things:
1) While I disagreed slightly with him on the business of "good" PCs killing prisoners in cold blood in D&D, it was a matter of something I considered bad taste -nothing more. At no point did I think EGG was some kind of monster*. For these peckerheads to dredge up that thread out of context is not only despicable, but shows a real hate-on for a man who has been dead now for FIFTEEN YEARS.
2) Like any reader who is not a total cretin, I took Gygax's idea of killing newly converted monsters/NPCs before they could go back to their wicked ways in the tongue-in-cheek way it was given. After all, no real orcs are being summarily executed. It's like watching Dirty Harry or Lethal Weapon where cops blow away bad guys all over town. Some people might find the violence stupid or gratuitous (or both), but that doesn't make the folks who enjoy those movies bad people. In other words, just as Callahan, Riggs and Murtaugh are considered "good" in those movies, so a holy knight smiting baddies without mercy is "good" in a GAME. I can't wait for the morons in that Reddit forum to demand funerals for all the sailors who die when kids play Battleship.
* In fact, he agreed with my solutions to avoid having such scenarios in the first place.
Quote from: Elfdart on April 04, 2023, 12:12:49 AM
Since Gary Gygax was addressing me in that discussion thread from 2005, I'd like to point out a couple of things:
1) While I disagreed slightly with him on the business of "good" PCs killing prisoners in cold blood in D&D, it was a matter of something I considered bad taste -nothing more. At no point did I think EGG was some kind of monster*. For these peckerheads to dredge up that thread out of context is not only despicable, but shows a real hate-on for a man who has been dead now for FIFTEEN YEARS.
This is a fair point.
Quote from: Elfdart on April 04, 2023, 12:12:49 AM2) Like any reader who is not a total cretin, I took Gygax's idea of killing newly converted monsters/NPCs before they could go back to their wicked ways in the tongue-in-cheek way it was given. After all, no real orcs are being summarily executed. It's like watching Dirty Harry or Lethal Weapon where cops blow away bad guys all over town. Some people might find the violence stupid or gratuitous (or both), but that doesn't make the folks who enjoy those movies bad people. In other words, just as Callahan, Riggs and Murtaugh are considered "good" in those movies, so a holy knight smiting baddies without mercy is "good" in a GAME. I can't wait for the morons in that Reddit forum to demand funerals for all the sailors who die when kids play Battleship.
* In fact, he agreed with my solutions to avoid having such scenarios in the first place.
Yep. If you aren't having fun then whats the point of playing? It's an Elfgame not real life. Sometimes people can take these games too seriously.
Quote from: Elfdart on April 04, 2023, 12:12:49 AM
Since Gary Gygax was addressing me in that discussion thread from 2005, I'd like to point out a couple of things:
1) While I disagreed slightly with him on the business of "good" PCs killing prisoners in cold blood in D&D, it was a matter of something I considered bad taste -nothing more. At no point did I think EGG was some kind of monster*. For these peckerheads to dredge up that thread out of context is not only despicable, but shows a real hate-on for a man who has been dead now for FIFTEEN YEARS.
2) Like any reader who is not a total cretin, I took Gygax's idea of killing newly converted monsters/NPCs before they could go back to their wicked ways in the tongue-in-cheek way it was given. After all, no real orcs are being summarily executed. It's like watching Dirty Harry or Lethal Weapon where cops blow away bad guys all over town. Some people might find the violence stupid or gratuitous (or both), but that doesn't make the folks who enjoy those movies bad people. In other words, just as Callahan, Riggs and Murtaugh are considered "good" in those movies, so a holy knight smiting baddies without mercy is "good" in a GAME. I can't wait for the morons in that Reddit forum to demand funerals for all the sailors who die when kids play Battleship.
* In fact, he agreed with my solutions to avoid having such scenarios in the first place.
Well when you hear the leftards make the same claims, you have to go to the thread, read the context and then explain to the zombies, that no they don't understand what was written because they took thier marching orders from Twitter and didn't have the intellectual curiousity to read the actual text from Gygax himself. When they actually read it then they have to answer for the crap and they can't, they just piss off.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on April 04, 2023, 10:21:09 AM
Well when you hear the leftards make the same claims, you have to go to the thread, read the context and then explain to the zombies, that no they don't understand what was written because they took their marching orders from Twitter and didn't have the intellectual curiosity to read the actual text from Gygax himself. When they actually read it then they have to answer for the crap and they can't, they just piss off.
I doubt they are smart enough or care enough to listen to reason. Besides, anything that goes against their narrative is BAD.
It just takes the wind out of their sails and it inoculates anyone who reads the post when they realize they were lied to.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on April 04, 2023, 12:01:49 PM
It just takes the wind out of their sails and it inoculates anyone who reads the post when they realize they were lied to.
Every bit helps. Anything that takes the wind out of the SJW's sails is a victory.