?

Log in

RPG theory/design/philosophy journal
A slightly different account of D&D roots 
4th-Apr-2008 11:50 am
chiang 2
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=136167

Note rmaker's post. I don't know what sources it's based on.
Comments 
5th-Apr-2008 03:39 am (UTC)
Well, it's interesting if true. You ought to post it to the Snake Pit and see what the alten kampfers who hang out there think of it. The last thread you guys had on Arneson and Gygax, and the ISO OD&D thread, were pretty interesting. Lot of contemporaneous perspectives mixed in with the "must have been this ways."
5th-Apr-2008 05:04 am (UTC)
Jim, which snake pit are you referring to?
5th-Apr-2008 01:58 pm (UTC)
Ther PG site.
12th-Apr-2008 05:56 am (UTC)
To highlight the revisionist theory of the post:

Gygax didn´t write the Fantasy apendix to Chainmail. This pretty much is 180° against what is established. Still intrigueing, it coud be solved by textual analysis. Gary DID write the DMG, PHB, MM, Greyhawk(OD&D) and Unearthed Arcana. I myself felt the Chainmail Fantasy supp to have the exact "Garyspeak" as the later supps.
But: I COULD imagine any Wargame designer to be a person who enjoyed medieval wargaing to a degree that he was very sceptical of adding "BS" to a simulation. Alas, from what is known from Garys personality, we´ll find that he tried to keep interest high for medieval wargaming, and that he read tons of Sword & Orcery. All that wouldn´t ring with the "Gary as histo-gamer-nazi-and-late-convert" theory.

So I´d think it´s (the revisionist part of the post) pure bullshit, although it´s using concepts and archetypes that were definitely around at the time. MOST wargamers cringed at the idea of adding fantasy BS to their games. Some still do and shake their fists at RPGs.

Finally, scientific text/word analysis could easily establish of the writer of the ADD&D hardcovers is the same person as the person writing portions of chainmail.
This page was loaded Jul 21st 2017, 10:46 pm GMT.