The Curious Case of Gail Gygax

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Well, technically it's WotC that created the last 3 editions, including the current one:smile:.
And, as people keep repeating, those are basically different games:wink:.

Well, one of them was, anyways...
 
I'd say 3, 3.5, 4 and 5 all have significant differences from what Gygax wrote. Which is what I mean by "different games", as in "different from the Gygax-styled D&D":smile:.

Sure, but thats not enough for WoTC to claim they "created D&D", just because their editions mostly aren't backwards compatible. That'd be like John Byrne claiming he created Superman, just because his Man of Steel reboot is significantly different from the original Siegel & Shuster comics.
 
Sure, but thats not enough for WoTC to claim they "created D&D", just because their editions mostly aren't backwards compatible. That'd be like John Byrne claiming he created Superman, just because his Man of Steel reboot is significantly different from the original Siegel & Shuster comics.
Or Gary Gygax claiming that AD&D was nothing to do with the work of Dave Arneson...
 
Sure, but thats not enough for WoTC to claim they "created D&D", just because their editions mostly aren't backwards compatible. That'd be like John Byrne claiming he created Superman, just because his Man of Steel reboot is significantly different from the original Siegel & Shuster comics.
I never said the claim would be correct:smile:.

What I'm saying is, keep repeating how WotC created D&D for another decade, and you'd have enough D&D players who haven't heard of Gygax, much like how most today players haven't heard of Dave Arneson or
David Wesely:wink:.
 
What I'm saying is, keep repeating how WotC created D&D for another decade, and you'd have enough D&D players who haven't heard of Gygax, much like how most today players haven't heard of Dave Arneson or
David Wesely:wink:.

Is WoTC actually claiming this, though? I mean, I just find it hard to believe a controversial statement like that would have escaped my notice up until this point, especially considering the inevitable online drama I'd expect on the forums in response to that.
 
Wait, what? I haven't heard anything about this before


I am not blaming the designers but the corporate entity. The corporate entity wants Wizards of the Coast to be known as the creator of D&D. It is less messy than the real history.
 
Is WoTC actually claiming this, though? I mean, I just find it hard to believe a controversial statement like that would have escaped my notice up until this point, especially considering the inevitable online drama I'd expect on the forums in response to that.


Next time you see a mainstream article about D&D notice how they list WoTC ad the creator. I'm not blaming the designers but as a corporate strategy they want to separate D&D from the past. The last Gygax edition was like 40 years ago. The last TSR edition was like 30 years ago. The bulk of D&D players never have played D&D when TSR or Gygax had anything to do with it. So I get WoTC wanting a simple message and bringing up Gygax just would confuse the situation. In a few years when 6E is announced us old Grognards will all be in the home.

I saw an article about D&D on the WSJ last year that really struck me with that comment about WoTC creating D&D. The writer of the article probably wasn't even born when TSR was a functional company.....
 
Well WotC is the owner of TSR the legal corporate creators of D&D so it's a semi truth.
 
Next time you see a mainstream article about D&D notice how they list WoTC ad the creator. I'm not blaming the designers but as a corporate strategy they want to separate D&D from the past. The last Gygax edition was like 40 years ago. The last TSR edition was like 30 years ago. The bulk of D&D players never have played D&D when TSR or Gygax had anything to do with it. So I get WoTC wanting a simple message and bringing up Gygax just would confuse the situation. In a few years when 6E is announced us old Grognards will all be in the home.

I saw an article about D&D on the WSJ last year that really struck me with that comment about WoTC creating D&D. The writer of the article probably wasn't even born when TSR was a functional company.....
Sic transit gloria mundi.
 
Aside from history for history's sake (and I say this as someone who majored in history and reads lots of books on history) knowing who wrote/published D&D in the original form is irrelevant to playing role-playing games in 2019. It has no affect in running or playing the game as written today.
 
Aside from history for history's sake (and I say this as someone who majored in history and reads lots of books on history) knowing who wrote/published D&D in the original form is irrelevant to playing role-playing games in 2019. It has no affect in running or playing the game as written today.

Sure, that was just as true in '74.

But if people/ companies start lying about history that's going to raise my hackles. I don't think WoTC has an obligation to promote Gygax or Arneson's names, but they also aren't entitled to sole credit for a creation that they didn't create
 
I don't buy WotC is trying to erase Gygax's connection to the game, he and Arneson AND Brian Blume, Don Kaye, Rob Kuntz and Jim Ward are all credited for 'the original D&D game' in the 5e PHB, DMG and MM.

Lots of WotC staff also attend Garycon and promote it via social media and the offical D&D podcast. They had Luke Gygax on the podcast to talk about Garycon and his memories of playing with his Dad. Note that Gygax is rightly called the co-creator of D&D, reflecting how they are careful to recognize Arneson.

The history of the TSR era is consistently recognized in 5e, so much so that they are now criticized for relying too much on nostaglia and 'retreads' of classic adventures.

The most recent example in The Ghosts of Saltmarsh are not only the 5e conversions of the classic Saltmarsh series of UK modules but the inclusion of side-panels with a write-up on the original module, its designers and cover.

If they're trying to erase history they're sure going about it in a strange manner.
 
Last edited:
I saw an article about D&D on the WSJ last year that really struck me with that comment about WoTC creating D&D. The writer of the article probably wasn't even born when TSR was a functional company.....
That sounds more likely to be a reporter covering a game he knows nothing under the pressure of a deadline than some kind of attempt by WotC/Hasbro to erase Gygax from the game's history.

As Voros says, WotC is almost exclusively in the business of selling glossy conversion of classic adventures from D&D history, and not attempting to hide where they came from. If anything, corporations love to give soulless products the veneer of homemade origins. The fact that D&D literally has its publishing origins in a garage is marketing gold.
 
That sounds more likely to be a reporter covering a game he knows nothing under the pressure of a deadline than some kind of attempt by WotC/Hasbro to erase Gygax from the game's history.

This. Bloody fucking this.

Having worked as a newspaper reporter, yeah, we get sent out to write articles about shit we know nothing about.

And the article is then cut to size by the editor. Never mind how much you wrote; if the editor has 2 columns by 4 inches, that's how much space you get. Period.
 
This. Bloody fucking this.

Having worked as a newspaper reporter, yeah, we get sent out to write articles about shit we know nothing about.

And the article is then cut to size by the editor. Never mind how much you wrote; if the editor has 2 columns by 4 inches, that's how much space you get. Period.
And don't get me started about turning in a perfectly good article only to have it saddled with headline that is completely misleading, which I then have people thinking I wrote.
 
This. Bloody fucking this.

Having worked as a newspaper reporter, yeah, we get sent out to write articles about shit we know nothing about.

And the article is then cut to size by the editor. Never mind how much you wrote; if the editor has 2 columns by 4 inches, that's how much space you get. Period.

Well the point of newspapers was, and is, as a delivery system for advertisements, so... :hehe: I know you must be speaking gospel truth there.
 
That sounds more likely to be a reporter covering a game he knows nothing under the pressure of a deadline than some kind of attempt by WotC/Hasbro to erase Gygax from the game's history.

As Voros says, WotC is almost exclusively in the business of selling glossy conversion of classic adventures from D&D history, and not attempting to hide where they came from. If anything, corporations love to give soulless products the veneer of homemade origins. The fact that D&D literally has its publishing origins in a garage is marketing gold.


You guys are probably right. I admit that I'm biased against WoTC and I don't give them the benefit of doubt or take things in a negative light just because I grew tired of the company after two editions of the game I really don't like.
 
You guys are probably right. I admit that I'm biased against WoTC and I don't give them the benefit of doubt or take things in a negative light just because I grew tired of the company after two editions of the game I really don't like.

I feel you. I spent many years in the trenches for 3.x/Pathfinder. I contributed my share. But walked away feeling messy as things started to move further away from what I felt and knew were better alternatives. At 4e - I realized... oh shit! we're really splitting up, aren't we?

It's been a clean breakup. I kept the kids. She went out and got wasted, and fooled around with gross people. I hear she cleaned herself up. Trying to fly straight and sensible now. We had coffee. But there is something "off" about her.

My new girlfriend is a savage and awesome tho. I take her around to all the places I used to go with DeeDee. The kids love doing things with her more. I see DeeDee is doing her thing, and that's great. I do mine too. It's amicable.
 
Sure, that was just as true in '74.

But if people/ companies start lying about history that's going to raise my hackles. I don't think WoTC has an obligation to promote Gygax or Arneson's names, but they also aren't entitled to sole credit for a creation that they didn't create
Everyone can calm down
10311
 
Trip Wire for the Win!!!

Perhaps that was a nod to Gary? That sounds like a Trap in a Dungeon.

It's a darn shame that I can't purchase a copy of Castle Zygag for $40 - $60 right now.
 
Trip Wire for the Win!!!

Perhaps that was a nod to Gary? That sounds like a Trap in a Dungeon.

It's a darn shame that I can't purchase a copy of Castle Zygag for $40 - $60 right now.

I saw a copy of Castle Zygag for $40 in a local used RPG store but when I went back for it it had sold.
 
Trip Wire for the Win!!!

Perhaps that was a nod to Gary? That sounds like a Trap in a Dungeon.

It's a darn shame that I can't purchase a copy of Castle Zygag for $40 - $60 right now.
But you can get it for free online! Not legally but it is just about the only current way to get it.
 
Piracy is for ass-munchers.
That makes for a nice soundbite but copyrite and the laws associated with it are a social contract. Society needs to be sure it is getting a fair deal and the author deserves the write to profit from their works. The current system is excessive. Under the original system the copyright laws would have given Gail 14 years to do something with it before it became public domain. Instead she did the opposite. Society got nothing for her choice. They didn't get a wealthier Gail and they didn't get information out into the world. So why should society make that deal?
 
Personal opinion: Piracy is terrible if the thing you are pirating is available for purchase in a way that supports the owners of the property, or in a way that is not expensive.

Like if the book is on drivethru, or you can buy it on the secondary market for 10 bucks, you should buy it.

But what about games that aren't in print, the pdfs aren't for sale, and they go for 300+ on the collector's market? Should those games just die out? Is that really the best interest of everyone involved?

If the owner of the property is making no money off of it anyway, it isn't hurting them to pirate it. In fact it could help if in the future they revisit the property, as it can increase the number of fans who are excited for a new release.

And it isn't better for the possible fans, who have no way of reasonably obtaining the things included.

I've mostly developed this idea based on old video games (and I was happy when virtual console showed up and made a way to buy a lot of those older games and support the owners of those properties, but there are still tons of old games that would just disappear if not for "pirates" archiving them), but it applies to any older piece of creative work.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top