Quote from: RPGPundit;1033479We all know how important Gygax and Arneson were. What about those who are still with us, though?

Of the people involved in the creation and early years of D&D, who is still alive who you think was probably the most important to the game?

None of them, not a single one, especially given the amount of bashing people do, especially this forum but not limited to, when talking about the later editions that most of them have worked on.  The hatred some of these get in my area is amazing.  You'd think Gygax was the only one who thought of the system and carried it all on his back.

Just for me personally Mike Mornard since he explaining how D&D was supposed to work "Conan + Daffy Duck" etc. etc. helped clean out a lot of old 90's Dragon Magazine article advice that had been moldering in the back of my head for too long.

The first question is to define what is meant by "founding fathers" of the game. The three little brown books all say "Gygax & Arneson" and I'll take them for their word on that. Greyhawk says "Gygax & Kuntz." Blackmoor says "Dave Arneson." Eldritch Wizardry says "Gygax & Blume." Gods DG & Heroes says "Kuntz & Ward."

So, I think that the list looks like this: (in alphabetical order)
Dave Arneson, Brian Blume, Gary Gygax, Rob Kuntz, and Jim Ward.

Taking this "founding fathers" list and eliminating both Gary and Dave, we're down to only three names and the second question of "who had the biggest impact." Of the three, seems to me like Rob Kuntz had the biggest impact on "the game" if you assume that "the game" is Dungeons & Dragons. If you interpret "the game" to be "the RPG industry" then it's a closer contest since Jim Ward's Metamorphosis Alpha and Gamma World contributions have to stand alongside his D&D credits as well. After all of these years, both Kuntz and Ward still stand tall in the world of RPGs, are still writing product, and continue to interact with fans.

Now, to add in a second layer of depth, look inside the booklets for the section where the authors thank contributors. Greyhawk adds in thanks to Alan Lucion, Mike Mornard, and Jeff Key. Blackmoor adds Tim Kask and Steve Marsh to our list. EW adds Dennis Sustare. GDG&H adds no new names.

Now our "founding fathers" list might look like this:
Dave Arneson, Brian Blume, Gary Gygax, Tim Kask, Rob Kuntz, Alan Lucion, Steve Marsh, Michael Mornard, Dennis Sustare, and Jim Ward.

Ten names, or eight once Arneson and Gygax are removed. I'm not going to follow up with a further ranking, but some of those names are more familiar than others and some clearly have contributed more than others. The whole picture becomes fuzzy if you want to add in later editions of D&D because some of the later versions found huge popularity. I guess the question comes down to how many names to put on the list, and how close to the genesis you want to define "founding."

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1033604None of them, not a single one, especially given the amount of bashing people do, especially this forum but not limited to, when talking about the later editions that most of them have worked on.  The hatred some of these get in my area is amazing.  You'd think Gygax was the only one who thought of the system and carried it all on his back.

I've said my peace on your own bashing in relation to the old-new divide, and don't feel the need to do so again. But, does the existence of adherents to the old rules who have done or said something you dislike mean that you have to dislike or dismiss the contributions of these people (who had nothing directly to do with the bashing you feel you experienced, and possibly weren't even alive at the time)?

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1033650I've said my peace on your own bashing in relation to the old-new divide, and don't feel the need to do so again. But, does the existence of adherents to the old rules who have done or said something you dislike mean that you have to dislike or dismiss the contributions of these people (who had nothing directly to do with the bashing you feel you experienced, and possibly weren't even alive at the time)?

Its Chris. Of course he has to freak out on any thread about D&D because apparently it something that was supposedly D&D raped him and he is still suffering the trauma.

Quote from: Omega;1033661Its Chris. Of course he has to freak out on any thread about D&D because apparently it something that was supposedly D&D raped him and he is still suffering the trauma.

And my point is (to use an analogy) that Gene Roddenberry isn't at fault because some Star Trek fan beet him up as a teen when he said that Star Wars was the better sci fi.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1033650I've said my peace on your own bashing in relation to the old-new divide, and don't feel the need to do so again. But, does the existence of adherents to the old rules who have done or said something you dislike mean that you have to dislike or dismiss the contributions of these people (who had nothing directly to do with the bashing you feel you experienced, and possibly weren't even alive at the time)?

??

I hate D&D?  I do?  AND NO ONE TOLD ME??  WHY AM I THE LAST ONE TO KNOW THESE THINGS???

Seriously, no.  I don't.  I just don't have the same reverence for some people.  Frankly, I think that most of the players at the original table or helped designed other editions should get some mention, but they're barely known.  Instead all we hear about is Gygax, and maybe Arneson.  But Ward, Kuntz, Cook et al?  They're ignored at best.  And if they're mentioned it's because they were part of the reviled 3e edition that the Edition Warriors love to trot out as the start of the downfall of D&D.  Because WOTC IS THE EVIL!

David "Zeb" Cook for example, a name no one has brought up here actually worked on Modovay's Expert Set, but he's pretty much ignored.

So no, the still surviving 'founders' get very little acknowledgement and likely never will.

Quote from: Omega;1033661Its Chris. Of course he has to freak out on any thread about D&D because apparently it something that was supposedly D&D raped him and he is still suffering the trauma.

I think D&D raped us all, and some of us, just liked it.:-)

(y'know, I didn't want to write that...then I did...)

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1033678??

I hate D&D?  I do?  AND NO ONE TOLD ME??  WHY AM I THE LAST ONE TO KNOW THESE THINGS???

Please re-read what you are quoting. You will notice that I did not say anything like this. You will also note that I was civil and calm. I would appreciate the same in return.

QuoteSeriously, no.  I don't.  I just don't have the same reverence for some people.  Frankly, I think that most of the players at the original table or helped designed other editions should get some mention, but they're barely known.  Instead all we hear about is Gygax, and maybe Arneson.  But Ward, Kuntz, Cook et al?  They're ignored at best.  And if they're mentioned it's because they were part of the reviled 3e edition that the Edition Warriors love to trot out as the start of the downfall of D&D.  Because WOTC IS THE EVIL!

Yes, we know how you feel about where this board stands with regard to the old-new divide. I said I wasn't going to go into my own disappointments with your own edition warriorship. None of that actually even remotely addresses what I asked--should Gygax and Arneson, or any of the other early era founders, get such anger from you because of hostility you feel you have suffered from their fans? If you don't want to answer, you are not obliged, but at least if you are going to address me, address the actual question I put forth.

QuoteDavid "Zeb" Cook for example, a name no one has brought up here actually worked on Modovay's Expert Set, but he's pretty much ignored.

A-HEM! ---

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1033526I am all for giving Frank and Moldvay and Dr. Holmes and Zeb and up through Bruce Heard and the like credit where credit is due, but do any of them count as 'people involved in the creation and early years of D&D?' I mean, once you get into that zone, the circle has already expanded to an unwieldy number of influencers including competitors, collaborators, financers and publishers and all of a sudden we're just retelling the whole schpiel.

...were you saying something?

None of the above. Try Mike Hirsch, of Moss & Barnett.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1033780None of the above. Try Mike Hirsch, of Moss & Barnett.

Hee hee hee...

Quote from: Daztur;1033605Just for me personally Mike Mornard since he explaining how D&D was supposed to work "Conan + Daffy Duck" etc. etc. helped clean out a lot of old 90's Dragon Magazine article advice that had been moldering in the back of my head for too long.

Thank you.

Quote from: chirine ba kal;1033780None of the above. Try Mike Hirsch, of Moss & Barnett.

What did he do?

Quote from: RPGPundit;1033935What did he do?

Short form: He drastically changed the way that D & D was written and presented by TSR, and forced the company's stable of authors to actually write new material.

Long form: He was Prof. Barker's lawyer, and Phil loaned Dave Arneson the money to retain Mr. Hirsch as Dave's second lawyer. He took over Dave's series of lawsuits against TSR, and changed the focus of the suit from the unanswerable "Who created D & D" to a straightforward plagarism and copyright one. He conclusively demonstrated in court that TSR's publications, specifically 'AD&D', were mostly cut-and-paste revised editions of the original Arneson-Gygax work and not 'new works'. Dave got three million bucks, his percentages, and TSR had to learn how to write games. The actual court documents are out there on the web for your viewing pleasure. Read the pre- and post- TSR materials, very carefully, and it does show. Most gamers never noticed, as they are so fixated on game mechanics that it goes right by them.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1033479Of the people involved in the creation and early years of D&D, who is still alive who you think was probably the most important to the game?

Kuntz.