Celebrating 2020 - The Year of Blackmoor - 50th Anniversary of Blackmoor and of Role-Playing!
Today I am going to start looking at Dungeons & Dragons - Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures. Men & Magic Volume 1 of Three Booklets.
The latest 2013 version makes several changes, Gygax & Arneson is replaced with Gary Gygax & Dave Arneson. That is a good change IMO. It also replaces Volume 1 of Three Booklets with Book I. the statement Published by Tactical Studies Rules is deleted, but not replaced with anything.
Some want to make a big deal about the the use of the word Wargames in the sub-title and about the Miniature Figures part of the sub-title. When OD&D was written the term Role-Playing Game was still in the future and at the time Gygax thought the market would be his fellow wargamers, it never occurred to anyone that the game would have a much wider appeal. Reading too much in the term Wargames in more than a generic sense is IMO a mistake. A lot of people also insist that you must use Miniature Figures; however, the rules/guidelines make it clear that miniatures are optional and you may use or not use them according to what works for you. I have never used them as a referee, I have used them as a player.
The changes on the title page inside is the removal of the copyright statement replaced by a Wizards of the Coast logo. and the changing of Volume 1 to Book I. The statement about where to send rules inquiries was also removed, which makes sense because TSR at the Lake Geneva address is long gone.
Even though directions for sending in rules inquiries was provided, no one in my group ever corresponded with TSR in Lake Geneva. We were never stuck or unsure about what to do, we made decisions and went on with the game. I will revisit this when I get to the Afterword in Volume 3.
The Table of Contents is labeled Index and is reasonably complete. A lot is made by some about how poorly organized these booklets are. I have never agreed with that. But then I came to OD&D with fresh eyes, not from eyes that are used to highly polished and highly edited modern games. I think OD&D gets a very bad rap that is undeserved.
No one ever wants to consider the context of the writing of OD&D. This was written for a specific audience - other wargamers. A lot of common knowledge in the hobby was left out, simply because it was indeed common knowledge. Had Gygax realized that OD&D would have had such a wide appeal, it is very likely that more of those details would have been included IMO. Be that as it may, we figured it out and did not have any trouble picking up the three slim volumes and playing the game. Anecdotal evidence says that a lot of other people were the same as my group, they figured it out and ran with it. Very few of the earliest adopters are on the internet today, very few. Many of the earliest adopters have already passed away.
Next we come to the Forward corrected to Foreward in the 2013 edition. Interestingly in the 1st print through the 4th print it says "Forward..." and in the 5th print it is "Forward" and in my copy of the 6th print the title is missing and it goes right into the text.
The only change in the text is the addition of the registered trademark symbol has been added when Chainmail and Dungeons & Dragons are first mentioned, but still not included for all mentions. The complete text sets the table for telling you that Dave Arneson created a complex and exciting game, that he showed it to Gygax and the result is in your hands.
He says that:
Gygax right in the Foreward mentions Burroughs and John Carter, Howard and Conan, de Camp & Pratt and their fantasies, and Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser. It is undeniable that there are some specific inspirations for D&D. Appendix N is actually rather limited, it is a curated list made by Gygax and Tim Kask, it is not even a complete list of the books they thought to be useful and inspiring. There are many other books that could be on that list.
IMO Burroughs, Howard and Fritz Leiber are the ones that really capture the spirit of OD&D. Many people come to D&D these days having not read any of the foundational fiction, even to the extent of being ignorant of mythology and fairy tales to say nothing of history and geography. Because of this it is IMO not possible for new people these days to approach D&D the way myself and others did, as they belong to a culture that is alien in many ways to the culture of the '50s, '60s and early '70s which still retained a lot of the older culture of the pre-TV and even pre-radio days.. I am not making a value judgement here, just making an observation.
You cannot fault younger players for not having the deep fantasy background that many of us old folks had when we were young. My family obtained its first TV in 1963 when I was 7, a few months before JFK was assassinated. TV was limited to 1-2 hours per day in the winter(at most) and none during heavy farm work times during the summer for the first few years and only gradually increased. There was a lot of talking around the kitchen table and a lot of reading and story-telling. Quite a bit different from kids and adults texting people sitting next to them. I know 20-somethings who can hardly bear it to look away from their phone. I cannot identify with that.
So let us look at the Introduction:
Further these days the alleged incompleteness of OD&D is a moot point. There are numerous clones of OD&D and there are all the other games that have been written over the last 46 years. If you are a referee (or DM) you have virtually infinite resources to help you fill in any holes that you think need filled in. Bitd we took filling in certain holes with house rules as part of the fun of the game and I still view it that way. We came up with our own house rules as we did not have these current infinite resources, I did not need them then, but I will from time to time use them now since they are commonly available.
In the 3rd sentence he spells out that as with any set of rules, these are guidelines to designing your own campaign. That should forever put an end to the loud voices of the rabid by the book crowd. But sadly it will not. The rules/guidelines provide a framework around which you build a game of simplicity or tremendous complexity. He says time and imagination are the only limits. He advises you to start slow and to follow the guidelines so that you do not get bogged down.
He says your campaign will build naturally at a pace best suited to you. This mean there is no ONE TRUE WAY to build your campaign. The rules, the guidelines tell you to go at your own pace and do what works for you.
He continues:
But how anyone who comes away from reading the three OD&D booklets and claims that it should be played by the book, well that is incomprehensible to me. But hey play anyway you want to, if that is fun for you, find some like minded people go for it. But please do not go around telling people that is the way Gygax and Arneson played the game. In fact for all of the Gygax Up On a Soapbox rants, he did not even play AD&D by the book, even while he was telling everyone that was the only thing that was acceptable. Yes, Gygax had feet of clay, he was human, but you do not get to use him to support by the book play. Is playing by the book bad wrong fun? No, not at all! Is it in accordance with the original spirit of the rules/guidelines, no it is not. Not a judgement, just an observation of the facts.
But I speak as someone who does not play any game by the book, any game I play where I am the host has house rules. That has been true since I was a very small child well before I started school. I believe that any game you play you should make it your own.
The bottom line is that the rules, the guidelines tell you in no uncertain terms both explicitly and implicitly that OD&D is meant to be house-ruled, to be tweaked to suit you at your table. Every campaign should be unique and different - that is how the game was designed and intended. The text is clear and about that there can be no valid debate. The text says what it says.
One more thing he says on this page:
Tomorrow we will continue.
Today I am going to start looking at Dungeons & Dragons - Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures. Men & Magic Volume 1 of Three Booklets.
The latest 2013 version makes several changes, Gygax & Arneson is replaced with Gary Gygax & Dave Arneson. That is a good change IMO. It also replaces Volume 1 of Three Booklets with Book I. the statement Published by Tactical Studies Rules is deleted, but not replaced with anything.
Some want to make a big deal about the the use of the word Wargames in the sub-title and about the Miniature Figures part of the sub-title. When OD&D was written the term Role-Playing Game was still in the future and at the time Gygax thought the market would be his fellow wargamers, it never occurred to anyone that the game would have a much wider appeal. Reading too much in the term Wargames in more than a generic sense is IMO a mistake. A lot of people also insist that you must use Miniature Figures; however, the rules/guidelines make it clear that miniatures are optional and you may use or not use them according to what works for you. I have never used them as a referee, I have used them as a player.
The changes on the title page inside is the removal of the copyright statement replaced by a Wizards of the Coast logo. and the changing of Volume 1 to Book I. The statement about where to send rules inquiries was also removed, which makes sense because TSR at the Lake Geneva address is long gone.
Even though directions for sending in rules inquiries was provided, no one in my group ever corresponded with TSR in Lake Geneva. We were never stuck or unsure about what to do, we made decisions and went on with the game. I will revisit this when I get to the Afterword in Volume 3.
The Table of Contents is labeled Index and is reasonably complete. A lot is made by some about how poorly organized these booklets are. I have never agreed with that. But then I came to OD&D with fresh eyes, not from eyes that are used to highly polished and highly edited modern games. I think OD&D gets a very bad rap that is undeserved.
No one ever wants to consider the context of the writing of OD&D. This was written for a specific audience - other wargamers. A lot of common knowledge in the hobby was left out, simply because it was indeed common knowledge. Had Gygax realized that OD&D would have had such a wide appeal, it is very likely that more of those details would have been included IMO. Be that as it may, we figured it out and did not have any trouble picking up the three slim volumes and playing the game. Anecdotal evidence says that a lot of other people were the same as my group, they figured it out and ran with it. Very few of the earliest adopters are on the internet today, very few. Many of the earliest adopters have already passed away.
Next we come to the Forward corrected to Foreward in the 2013 edition. Interestingly in the 1st print through the 4th print it says "Forward..." and in the 5th print it is "Forward" and in my copy of the 6th print the title is missing and it goes right into the text.
The only change in the text is the addition of the registered trademark symbol has been added when Chainmail and Dungeons & Dragons are first mentioned, but still not included for all mentions. The complete text sets the table for telling you that Dave Arneson created a complex and exciting game, that he showed it to Gygax and the result is in your hands.
He says that:
Its possibilities go far beyond any previous offerings anywhere!
The section of this booklet entitled Scope will provide an idea of just how many possibilities are inherent in DUNGEONS & DRAGONS.
These rules are strictly fantasy. Those wargamers who lack imagination, those who don’t care for Burroughs’ Martian adventures where John Carter is groping through black pits, who feel no thrill upon reading Howard’s Conan saga, who do not enjoy the de Camp & Pratt fantasies or Fritz Leiber’s Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser pitting their swords against evil sorceries will not be likely to find DUNGEONS & DRAGONS to their taste. But those whose imaginations know no bounds will find that these rules are the answer to their prayers. With this last bit of advice we invite you to read on and enjoy a “world” where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!A lot is made of Appendix N in 1st Ed AD&D. Some want to study those books to find the origin of every single idea in OD&D. But that is doomed to failure and it did not happen that way. Arneson and Gygax did not set down and create D&D that way. They each had different influences from all manner of books, folk and fairy tales, mythology, movies, wargames and a lot of other things. Many things they thought of they were not even aware of where the ideas came from and they also used ideas from their players, from their play-testers. On the other hand there are those people who hate Appendix N and openly mock fans of Appendix N. Those people IMO miss the mark by an even wider margin, by the false claim that it is not useful to read those books, when reading those books is useful as a resource of ideas. You might as well claim reading history is not useful in creating your own countries or that studying geography is not useful in designing your own maps.
E. Gary Gygax 1 November 1973
Gygax right in the Foreward mentions Burroughs and John Carter, Howard and Conan, de Camp & Pratt and their fantasies, and Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser. It is undeniable that there are some specific inspirations for D&D. Appendix N is actually rather limited, it is a curated list made by Gygax and Tim Kask, it is not even a complete list of the books they thought to be useful and inspiring. There are many other books that could be on that list.
IMO Burroughs, Howard and Fritz Leiber are the ones that really capture the spirit of OD&D. Many people come to D&D these days having not read any of the foundational fiction, even to the extent of being ignorant of mythology and fairy tales to say nothing of history and geography. Because of this it is IMO not possible for new people these days to approach D&D the way myself and others did, as they belong to a culture that is alien in many ways to the culture of the '50s, '60s and early '70s which still retained a lot of the older culture of the pre-TV and even pre-radio days.. I am not making a value judgement here, just making an observation.
You cannot fault younger players for not having the deep fantasy background that many of us old folks had when we were young. My family obtained its first TV in 1963 when I was 7, a few months before JFK was assassinated. TV was limited to 1-2 hours per day in the winter(at most) and none during heavy farm work times during the summer for the first few years and only gradually increased. There was a lot of talking around the kitchen table and a lot of reading and story-telling. Quite a bit different from kids and adults texting people sitting next to them. I know 20-somethings who can hardly bear it to look away from their phone. I cannot identify with that.
So let us look at the Introduction:
These rules are as complete as possible within the limitations imposed by the space of three booklets. That is, they cover the major aspects of fantasy campaigns but still remain flexible. As with any other set of miniatures rules they are guidelines to follow in designing your own fantastic-medieval campaign. They provide the framework around which you will build a game of simplicity or tremendous complexity — your time and imagination are about the only limiting factors, and the fact that you have purchased these rules tends to indicate that there is no lack of imagination — the fascination of the game will tend to make participants find more and more time. We advise, however, that a campaign be begun slowly, following the steps outlined herein, so as to avoid becoming too bogged down with unfamiliar details at first. That way your campaign will build naturally, at the pace best suited to the referee and players, smoothing the way for all concerned. New details can be added and old “laws” altered so as to provide continually new and different situations. In addition, the players themselves will interact in such a way as to make the campaign variable and unique, and this is quite desirable.The vast majority claims that the rules of OD&D are incomplete - too incomplete to be playable. I disagree with those claims. He says that the major aspects are covered, but flexibility is retained. I fully agree with that. This is a long standing disagreement which boils down to this - do you place high value on the game being open-ended and flexible or do you place a high value on having a rule for everything and no flexibility. If you are in the open-ended and flexible camp, then OD&D is the game for you and it is complete enough for you to play.
Further these days the alleged incompleteness of OD&D is a moot point. There are numerous clones of OD&D and there are all the other games that have been written over the last 46 years. If you are a referee (or DM) you have virtually infinite resources to help you fill in any holes that you think need filled in. Bitd we took filling in certain holes with house rules as part of the fun of the game and I still view it that way. We came up with our own house rules as we did not have these current infinite resources, I did not need them then, but I will from time to time use them now since they are commonly available.
In the 3rd sentence he spells out that as with any set of rules, these are guidelines to designing your own campaign. That should forever put an end to the loud voices of the rabid by the book crowd. But sadly it will not. The rules/guidelines provide a framework around which you build a game of simplicity or tremendous complexity. He says time and imagination are the only limits. He advises you to start slow and to follow the guidelines so that you do not get bogged down.
He says your campaign will build naturally at a pace best suited to you. This mean there is no ONE TRUE WAY to build your campaign. The rules, the guidelines tell you to go at your own pace and do what works for you.
He continues:
If you are a player purchasing the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS rules in order to improve your situation in an existing campaign, you will find that there is a great advantage in knowing what is herein. If your referee has made changes in the rules and/or tables, simply note them in pencil (for who knows when some flux of the cosmos will make things shift once again!), and keep the rules nearby as you play. A quick check of some rule or table may bring hidden treasure or save your game “life.”Contrary to some, I do not believe that Gygax was giving encouragement to rules lawyers here. Dave Arneson is known to have said that he, "regards rules lawyers as the enemy." Fortunately I have never had to contend with rules lawyers at my table, which is a very good thing for both myself and for them. The important thing here is to note that the referee making changes in the rules and then changing them again is considered to be a normal thing in the game. Again this should forever put an end to the loud voices of the rabid by the book crowd. But sadly it will not.
But how anyone who comes away from reading the three OD&D booklets and claims that it should be played by the book, well that is incomprehensible to me. But hey play anyway you want to, if that is fun for you, find some like minded people go for it. But please do not go around telling people that is the way Gygax and Arneson played the game. In fact for all of the Gygax Up On a Soapbox rants, he did not even play AD&D by the book, even while he was telling everyone that was the only thing that was acceptable. Yes, Gygax had feet of clay, he was human, but you do not get to use him to support by the book play. Is playing by the book bad wrong fun? No, not at all! Is it in accordance with the original spirit of the rules/guidelines, no it is not. Not a judgement, just an observation of the facts.
But I speak as someone who does not play any game by the book, any game I play where I am the host has house rules. That has been true since I was a very small child well before I started school. I believe that any game you play you should make it your own.
The bottom line is that the rules, the guidelines tell you in no uncertain terms both explicitly and implicitly that OD&D is meant to be house-ruled, to be tweaked to suit you at your table. Every campaign should be unique and different - that is how the game was designed and intended. The text is clear and about that there can be no valid debate. The text says what it says.
One more thing he says on this page:
Read through the entire work in the order presented before you attempt to play.That is good advice for any game.
Tomorrow we will continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment