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/

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. 
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/

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.