"Dave Arneson's True Genius": April 13th at 6:00AM EDT

[Deleted]

Sure, but you're talking about taming the Lightning of the Gods. I'm complaining about the fact that most people aren't even competent to change a light bulb.

[robkuntz]

Apr 19, 2017 13:34:36 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Sure, but you're talking about taming the Lightning of the Gods. I'm complaining about the fact that most people aren't even competent to change a light bulb.

Yeah.  It really goes back to the fact that if you are a true designer rather than an imitator of templates that you are already thinking in systems intuitively.  For example, Arneson was able to produce one of the more unique system structures in games and play, but did he ever describe it?  No. Did he know how it worked and what to do with it?  Most assuredly.  The problem we have today in game design which keeps us from understanding games as systems is the avid imitation of readily available templates. We are creating more people, than in the more rigorous board game design arena, that know how to imitate rather than originate.  This does not over time grow the understanding of games as systems and thus does not increase a growing design-systems-knowledge base of our hobby which would otherwise exponentially and more quickly produce truly new designs of the caliber that Arneson created.  Most designs are not being judged today in this industry by their conceptual breadth compared to Arneson's concept, but mostly by their features.  It doesn't take much design theory or system's thinking to achieve minor promotions of this sort.

[ripx187]

Man, this book is good, but it is infuriating as well. Most of the citations refer to a book that hasn't been published yet . . . perhaps two?

Keep em coming back for more, right? I'm hooked. Got halfway through it last night but I ran out of light. You know that you are reading a good book when you don't have all of the pages but you keep reading it anyway. It is nice to know that I can continue my favorite PBP here called, "So when is your book coming out, Rob"

On a more serious note, you have, I feel, given the best definition of what it is that we do. Describing to others why we sit around a table and play pretend either ends well or it doesn't. You also identify and clarify thoughts that I have had about the system for years but in a concise way which both strengthens and expands what I have been grasping at for so long.

I had taken a very long break from gaming, and when I came back to it, I played MUCH differently than I did as a youngster. The game functions better, we took our time and just did what we wanted to. You go into a house to search it, there is no dice for that now, I make the player search it. One of the clubs founding members returned for a game, he had heard that it wasn't just a hack and slash anymore and he got curious about it. During play he'd try old tactics that rely on dice, and would get frustrated when I forced him to use his brain instead; however, the very next session he came back ready to go.

I had a hard time grasping what I did, what was different, and I finally figured it out! I allowed the player's thoughts and ideas to become more important to the game than the dice. If the player can't mentally accomplish a goal, or just becomes overwhelmed, we can always use the dice, but we don't have to. People come first, not the system. This philosophy, once it takes hold, changes the dynamics of the game in a positive way. This book really reinforces this principle, and even extends my personal awareness of how far this knowledge can really take us.

Thank you!

[robkuntz]

Apr 19, 2017 18:26:36 GMT -5 ripx187 said:

Man, this book is good, but it is infuriating as well. Most of the citations refer to a book that hasn't been published yet . . . perhaps two?

Keep em coming back for more, right? I'm hooked. Got halfway through it last night but I ran out of light. You know that you are reading a good book when you don't have all of the pages but you keep reading it anyway. It is nice to know that I can continue my favorite PBP here called, "So when is your book coming out, Rob"

On a more serious note, you have, I feel, given the best definition of what it is that we do. Describing to others why we sit around a table and play pretend either ends well or it doesn't. You also identify and clarify thoughts that I have had about the system for years but in a concise way which both strengthens and expands what I have been grasping at for so long.

---

Thank you!

You are welcome.  Infuriating, heh?... :  Well, tell me about it.  I got to 170,000 words written on "New Ethos'" and then had to move and seek sources of income to sustain myself which in essence started to push its finish further and further into the future.  But I had all this matter, had announced doing it during the Grognard Games interview, and then I met my future wife while trying to organize a life before my move, which then resulted in me moving to France and marrying.  I finally decided to dive in and test the waters of the more larger work, which is dedicated to Dave Arneson and the MMSA, by finally stating in no uncertain terms what Dave created and what it was in systems terms.  The actual "work" started as three separate essays and then I realized they were all leagued, that I was writing another book, albeit a shorter one but packed with information (concision is something a writer must aim for). So, I am not rich, and it will take a full year to finish the remaining matter for "New Ethos" and then, with luck, "New Models for RPGs" will follow. In between there are other contracted works that I am doing outside of TLS, and some major negotiating going on regarding a large change which would be fortuitous for its completion.

So I hope the last half is as good for you as the first half was.  Do tell when you are finished.

Cheers,

Rob

[robkuntz]

I have received my author's copies from Paul and the book surely feels nice in the hands! Congratulations to my wife for a wonderful layout job; and a salute to Dave Arneson and the MMSA who made all of this possible to begin with.

[Deleted]

I'm looking forward to reading this.

My Jedi powers tell me that most people will be confused by or disparaging of this book, not because the book is bad, but because most people are booger-eating morons.

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2017 14:10:12 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Apr 19, 2017 13:34:36 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Sure, but you're talking about taming the Lightning of the Gods. I'm complaining about the fact that most people aren't even competent to change a light bulb.

Yeah.  It really goes back to the fact that if you are a true designer rather than an imitator of templates that you are already thinking in systems intuitively.

And most people aren't even good imitators.  The notion of "what effect will changing this have on play" has escaped 99 44/100% of the people writing game "stuff" these days, including the people put in charge of D&D 3rd edition.

But the sh*tty quality of most modern RPGs, and they way they utterly stifle player and referee creativity, is probably another rant.

[captaincrumbcake]

Apr 20, 2017 12:35:34 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I'm looking forward to reading this.

My Jedi powers tell me that most people will be confused by or disparaging of this book, not because the book is bad, but because most people are booger-eating morons.

 I simply hate my brain. darn it! why can't I think 2 thoughts to completion?

This, is what I meant to type:
I gave up boogers when I became interested in girls; disinterested in women when they decided that erections are a good thing; now that mine is few and far between.
There, it is said.

But I'm gonna hold on to my moronity, if you don't mind!

[robkuntz]

Apr 20, 2017 15:05:49 GMT -5 captaincrumbcake said:

Apr 20, 2017 12:35:34 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I'm looking forward to reading this.

My Jedi powers tell me that most people will be confused by or disparaging of this book, not because the book is bad, but because most people are booger-eating morons.

I gave up boogers when I became disinterested in women.

But I'm gonna hold on to my moronity, if you don't mind!

Well it appears that the two--giving up on women and holding onto your moronity--are related, perhaps.  The two genders traditionally are like two flowers in the field just waiting to cross pollinate.  They come with different scents but the attractions and complimentary natures they exhibit between each other can be the sweetest nectar.  You just have to know how to bottle it.

[robkuntz]

Apr 20, 2017 12:39:19 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Apr 19, 2017 14:10:12 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Yeah.  It really goes back to the fact that if you are a true designer rather than an imitator of templates that you are already thinking in systems intuitively.

I'm looking forward to reading this.

My Jedi powers tell me that most people will be confused by or disparaging of this book, not because the book is bad, but because most people are booger-eating morons.

Well sometimes people need to be lead.  I am not afraid of the consensus, never have been.  This will be the second time I've aligned against the establishment (when helping start TSR and promoting D&D was the first).  I'll win again, just as we did then, and with the same concept that we were adamantly defending then, but this time it will be explained in full, which points back to the reasons for the first fight now 43 years removed. Somewhat like deja-vu for me, in fact, but on the obverse side of the coin of this history.

[robkuntz]

Could anyone here who has received the book confirm that you also received an e-mail notice from TLS's site that your order was being shipped to you? We are checking the back-end system for this on our site to confirm that it is functioning properly. Thanks one and all!

[captaincrumbcake]

I can confirm that I received an e-mail notifying me that it had been shipped. I also got it earlier today, and read it.

Thank you, sir. And well done.

[bestialwarlust]

Yes I received an email when my order was shipped.

[Admin Pete]

I also received the email!

[robkuntz]

Apr 20, 2017 21:24:02 GMT -5 captaincrumbcake said:

I can confirm that I received an e-mail notifying me that it had been shipped. I also got it earlier today, and read it.

Thank you, sir. And well done.

That's it? Well done? You say more here about whether an imaginary dwarf has a beard or not...  lol!

[robkuntz]

Thanks for the feedback. It's always nice to know that what we pay for actually works!

[robkuntz]

Apr 20, 2017 12:35:34 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I'm looking forward to reading this.

My Jedi powers tell me that most people will be confused by or disparaging of this book, not because the book is bad, but because most people are booger-eating morons.

Your thoughts align, somewhat, with my own.  The hatchet-job has commenced as I thought it would.

LINK:  plus.google.com/+GregGorgonmilk/posts/aXAsb1Y1zvb

My thoughts are as follows:  “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Mahatma Gandhi

[robkuntz]

I do hope that PD has finished reading it (for the third time) and can post his thoughts soon.

[robkuntz]

I have decided to post the Preface to the book:

@2017 Three Line Studio and Robert J. Kuntz.  All Rights Reserved.

PREFACE

Many years ago a man who loved to design--in many dictionaries being “The purposeful or inventive arrangement of parts or details”--started upon a course of organizing thoughts and procedures from which he produced a historical leap in game design history, play theory and game theory, among many other unique impacts, all of which the majority of us today pretty much take for granted.

Very little is really even known about this man or his thoughts, and who many people today (sometimes timidly or often very dimly) associate with the beginning of what is referred to as RPG history.

That man is of course David L. Arneson, the inventor of the RPG conceptual engine. He and his players from the Twin Cities were the founding Fantasy Role-Players of the world, and almost a good two years before they introduced Dave’s concept to Gary Gygax, myself, my brother Terry Kuntz and Ernie Gygax in November 1972.

Within these pages I reveal many events that occurred following that meeting, and in a condensed form;2 and including the resulting publication and commercial use of Dave’s fully born concept as a reiterated form--known today as Classic Dungeons & Dragons--by Gygax and Arneson. And I also examine the fall of the concept which is intimately leagued with Gary Gygax’s eventual change of direction with it, and which coincides with his fall out with Arneson.

However, this is by no means a comprehensive or even passing study of the matter concerning the aforementioned fall out between the two designers of the original D&D game, even though some matter concerning the two that is relevant to this treatise must be noted in order to frame specific circumstances. It is, however, and on the main, a relevant note regarding the regressive future imposed upon Arneson’s concept after that fall out occurred; and concerning the former concept, that TSR, as then ostensibly lead by Mr. Gygax, had enthusiastically forwarded as consonant with their philosophical intents--past, present and future--before such a regression was instituted.

My intention with this work is far more advantageous for the reader thereof; and it certainly retains and promotes the breadth of spirit as once maintained by all principal persons from those foundational years, 1971-1974. And this breadth does include its most spirited point: That Arneson’s genius leap into an area never before historically ventured upon, that this gargantuan stride was not only gold for the pocket but a gem for the minds of those who came into contact with it. This concept was a scintillating array of possibilities that too soon was to be changed (i.e., remodeled) by Gygax from its holistic sense as Arneson had organized and forwarded it; and therethrough it was transformed into what could be predominately retained for the pocket alone.

Herein will also be revealed the beginning of “Arneson’s Code.” And such a beginning! If we were so lucky during any one of our days or years to be enabled to conceive of only one of the many and sumptuous conceptual leaps that Arneson attained then we would think good of ourselves in light of the enterprise, hobby or industry in which we endeavored. But yet today his muted concept remains near-anecdotal “History” by way of a muted history of the man himself.

There is no “cracking the code” Arneson arrived at, unless by that course one would mean either expanding or contracting his concept. And unfortunately the latter case is what has persisted since his ground-breaking code was ultimately buried over by a less vital substance than he’d unearthed.

So this work is a prelude, a suggestion, as well as a consideration of many things as now seen or that may be faintly apparent on the horizon--a wider view of what Arneson set into motion and perhaps of what he foresaw as possible other progressions resulting therefrom.

For Dave Arneson certainly had massive vision, this as noted by the fact alone that he leapt past 2,000 years of game design history by “simply” rejecting or reorganizing its “sacred standards.”

All in a day’s work, so to speak, for the man who “just helped” to design D&D...


Robert J. Kuntz
7 April, 2016
Corsica, France

FOOTNOTES 1 and 2:

1 Expansion as related to both his original concept and the market in tandem with it.

2 Arneson’s concept, the history it spawned, what it is, where it derives from and its ultimate extensibility, is detailed in my upcoming book, “A New Ethos in Game Design: The Paradigm Shift Originated by Dungeons & Dragons, 1972-1977”; note the end matter for a synopsis of its main parts. This monograph is a precursor to that book.

[Admin Pete]

Apr 22, 2017 15:24:17 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

I do hope that PD has finished reading it (for the third time) and can post his thoughts soon.

I had my game tonight (first one since my wife went into the hospital) and I expect to post comments about the book here tomorrow.

[Admin Pete]

I do have a few thoughts about "Dave Arneson's True Genius" by robkuntz. I received my copy promptly after ordering and have now read it several times in and around all the real life health issues with my wife. I found it to be an enjoyable and informative read. It confirmed many things that I long believed to be true. It also made me think about a lot of things. It also gave me more insight into things I never knew or suspected and it also presented corrections for long held statements by others in the community. Right now it is hard to gather my thoughts into any orderly arrangement for presentation.

Bitd when I started playing OD&D in 1975 the 3LBBs stated clearly that the authors were Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, in the "Forward" it clearly states that Dave Arneson developed and created ideas for a exciting and more complex game and eventually at some later date Gygax was introduced to it. So we understood from the beginning that Dave Arneson created the game that eventually became D&D. We also understood that Gary Gygax was the one who was the primary writer of the written word that we held in our hands. We assumed based on the evidence of the document itself, that Arneson had created the game and that to some extent what we were playing was the Gygax interpretation of what Arneson created.

Reading this book it became clear what we long believed was indeed true, the concept (conceptual engine) of D&D was all Arneson, but the mechanics used in D&D were largely the preferences of Gygax. Meaning of course what we always suspected was true and that Arneson must have used mechanics to some degree (perhaps more than we understand) that were quite a bit different from the D&D we played. In the FFC campaign we get a glimpse of differing mechanics and in AiF we get further glimpses of some of the directions that Arneson went. Arneson likely tried and discard or tried and developed and extended thousands of ideas throughout his life that would have filled up dozens of idea supplements that we would all like to mine and sift. Shame that there were not many Blackmoor Grimoires as there were Arduin Grimoires - no censorship by some unimaginative editor, just print it all.

As the book confirms, Arneson never had a cut and dried - frozen in amber game. I have read elsewhere about Gygax receiving notes from Arneson and having trouble working with them (Arneson carried so much of the game in his head and unfortunately was not great at recording things as they changed). This must have been the point that Gygax started inserting his own mechanics (we can speculate that email might have reduced the degree to which this happened had it been around, but we will never know). Although not part of this book, we also know from Tim Kask’s own writing that he received a "basket" of Arneson's notes and because they had a lot of different ways of doing things that were not compatible, instead of printing it all as rule alternates and giving us all a glimpses of how mutable the system and sub-systems were, he pretty much threw most of it out and filled the Blackmoor supplement out with things that were not Arneson's. We now have a view into knowing that much the same thing must have happened with OD&D. It makes one wonder if we are missing 10-12 pages (or more) of alternate rules direct from Arneson in OD&D itself.

I always wondered why Arneson had reportedly quit TSR bitd, so it was sad to learn that Gygax had marginalized Arneson's input from the moment that Arneson moved to Lake Geneva and then ultimately forced him out. Sad, but unfortunately understandable. What was really odd was the treatment of Rob himself. Here is a guy who was mentored and befriended by Gygax, was made a Co-DM of Greyhawk and contributed ideas to OD&D, was co-author of two of the four supplements and contributed to the others and yet Gygax consigned him to shipping and order fulfillment instead of in the design and creation end of things. Makes you wonder what was going on it Gygax's head at the time.

It puts the lie to long held and long championed claims and proclamations by those who were not there and yet they claim to be the keepers (and gatekeepers) of the old school style of play. But none of what they preach is the way that Arneson played or reffed and is not what Arneson first unveiled for Gary, Rob and a few others. In addition, Gygax never even played the way these people falsely claim is the correct way to play.

This book should be an eyeopener to all and I have only scratched the surface. You really need to read it, because I can only tell you how it is impacting me and your deserve to experience it firsthand.


Thus ends my first installment and more to follow.

[mormonyoyoman]

THIS is what I look for in a review. I always wanted to buy and read this book; now I know why I want to buy and read this book.

[Mighty Darci]

Why so much vitriol directed towards Dave Arneson and towards you robkuntz? As PD says, when you stop and think about it, it is pretty obvious that Gary Gygax did not create D&D, when Dave Arneson was playing it for nearly two years before Gary Gygax even knew about it. And we have the testimony of those like @gronanofsimmerya that the publishing of D&D did not change how Blackmoor and Greyhawk were being played and further that by all accounts neither Arneson or Gygax, ever once played the RAW.

[robkuntz]

Apr 23, 2017 22:21:44 GMT -5 Mighty Darci said:

Why so much vitriol directed towards Dave Arneson and towards you robkuntz ? As PD says, when you stop and think about it, it is pretty obvious that Gary Gygax did not create D&D, when Dave Arneson was playing it for nearly two years before Gary Gygax even knew about it. And we have the testimony of those like @gronanofsimmerya that the publishing of D&D did not change how Blackmoor and Greyhawk were being played and further that by all accounts neither Arneson or Gygax, ever once played the RAW.

I can answer this and do so in the book's third essay.  As for the vitriol one sustains, that comes from the established adherent base that believes that Gary did everything and that he is the be all and end al of everything from those days.  This view was of course promoted by EGG himself and that is all I "will" say on that for now.

Listen, there's lots of history in this book as well, nearly half of it by my estimates, but I am somewhat remiss for having to include the stock-holder's meeting part that was necessary to highlight Arneson's position, not for the fact that it does not deserve the light of day, but for the fact that many people are concentrating on that and not on Arneson's genius leap.  Please keep in mind that without Arneson starting to organize this genius system in May of 1971, recognizing it--and furthering its promotion--as something of worth, and then unveiling it to us in Lake Geneva in NOV 1972, well, none of us would be gathered here today. I am unconcerned with the way Gary treated me in those days, or even how those today treat me.  They don't know the circumstances of those times and don't care to learn them from the sources, me included.  

I am looking forward to PD posting more on the book.  Pass our well wishes along to your wife PD!!

[Admin Pete]

Apr 24, 2017 11:09:34 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Pass our well wishes along to your wife PD!!

I did and my wife appreciates it and thanks you both for it!

[Admin Pete]

Part II

OK, time to take a further look into “Dave Arneson’s True Genius” by robkuntz . I depart from the text frequently to insert my own comments and interpretations, hey at least I admit I am doing it. I also jump around a lot.

In the preface, he notes that the focus of the book is not about the fall out that occurred between Arneson and Gygax, although some details are provided for the sake of clarity. Matters that I touched on a bit in my first post. The focus of the book is more so on the way that Arneson's open-ended concept, that Gygax (and TSR) initially championed, ended up being placed in the straight jacket of a closed system. The original concept was open-ended and had no natural limits and the guidelines were mutable and ever changing and it devolved into a closed system and over time with each re-write more and more limits were placed on it and the freedom of the players and the DM was taken away.

While Gygax was devolving the original D&D into a completely different game, he kept playing the original way, an unbounded way at the same time he would get "Up on a Soapbox" and condemn playing any other way than the one true way, the by the book way, which he never played himself. The old “don't do as I do, do as I say” which never seems to work with kids, but someone how did work with a lot of D&D players. Rob takes a look at quite a few Gygax quotes that can easily be verified and points out the self-contradictory things that Gygax said at different points in time. If I was not already familiar with most of these I wonder how one person could represent both opposed ends of the matter.

Back to the meat of the book. He alludes to the fact that this book is a prelude to a more in depth look at what Arneson set in motion. The critics are quick to jump on this and dog this work to say Rob should have just waited and brought out the other longer work which is mentioned a few times in the book. I find these arguments to be disingenuous to the extreme and tinged more with jealously than anything else.

Rob goes on to say, “For Dave Arneson certainly had massive vision, this as noted by the fact alone that he leapt past 2,000 years of game design history by” simply" rejecting or reorganizing its “sacred standards.”

The first essay is titled:

From Vision to Vicissitude: The Rise and Reversal of Arneson’s RPG Concept

A little way into this chapter Rob (by my count) details 26 of the leaps in conceptual design that Arneson made. Take a moment and think about this before you read it. Make your own list of what you think that Arneson's design leaps are, spend some time and try to make the best list you can, then read this section in the book and see how you did. Look at the things that are not on your list and consider them. Now do this, if you are familiar with later editions of D&D, whether AD&D or 3E or 5E, and think about how many of these leaps are still intact. Can you imagine a 5E restored to the full original concept of Arneson or can you imagine a completely new game that you might devise by furthering the original concept along your own path.

One example: “Co-evolves the game and the players at the same time (real-time bi-directional synergy).”

Do you know what I notice when I play OD&D with kids? They very quickly grasp the concept that actions/decisions have consequences. My best player ever was a 9 year old girl who seemed to intuit the entire thing the first time she played. She had a complete grasp of the difference between fantasy and reality, her focus was completely in the game during the game and she completely bought into the world she was in. She noticed and acted upon things that the other players ignored or walked past. I saw in action that "real-time bi-directional synergy" watching her play the game. Very decisive and made great decisions. It was so much fun to watch a player that did not hesitate and agonize over decisions, she went with her gut in real time and the game flowed. The players with experience were a hindrance to her play, to be candid. I wish I had 50 players similar to her and could game all the time with them.


More to follow, perhaps Wednesday.

[Cedgewick]

Hello Rob,

Could you explain and provide an example of what you mean on pgs 12 and 51 by "Ongoing granularity of applied thought through embedded design principles"?

Thanks!

[robkuntz]

This one is simple and is based on Gary's quotes (both paraphrased) that the game can be simple or complex and that the "Laws" can be changed to create new and different situations. So. the design itself gives us a guide through these exhortations from Gary (and Arneson if you look at his quotes elsewhere) as to how to granularly manipulate content, mostly due to the simple mechanic used. A published example is how Gary and I extolled that philosophy through supplement #1 to D&D, Greyhawk. A better published example is D&D itself, as it was a promotion of Dave's Blackmoor/FFC.

[Crimhthan The Great]

Apr 25, 2017 11:15:00 GMT -5 Cedgewick said:

Hello Rob,

Could you explain and provide an example of what you mean on pgs 12 and 51 by "Ongoing granularity of applied thought through embedded design principles"?

Thanks!

Have an exalt Cedgewick for asking a question. Please anyone that has questions, ask them. Likely someone else has the same question too. A book has been published and the author resides among us ready to answer questions and clear up any confusion.


I will add my two coppers to what robkuntz said.

First to quote part of the introduction in OD&D if you do not have a copy yet:

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.

Rob often describes things in the technical language of design and uses words and phrases that most of us may not often use or be familiar with. Sometimes that may hinder understanding. However, there are a lot of old Refs on this site to chime in and Rob himself is very approachable, so we should always ask if something is not clear to us.

Regarding the above quoted text, this is one of IMO definitive statements that establishes from the beginning that this is a game like no other and that it is indeed by definition an open system. These are not "rules" they are "guidelines" and as such we can color inside or outside the lines as it suits us individually. This establishes that there is no by the book in OD&D, that concept (closed system) is the anti-OD&D. We are encouraged and instructed to remake the game in our own image and that of no one else, although of course it will be influenced by everything we have heard, seen, read, tasted, touched, smelled or experienced. In the beginning no two campaigns were alike and that is as it should be, note the part that I placed in bold.

All of the things that are debated around the forums and blogs, of level limits, alignment and on and on, often with harsh words and hard feelings between people are irrelevant in that context. The only reason to discuss these things is not to reach a consensus or to prove that one way is better than the other, it is find out the many different ways that different people handle things, and that may spur you on to some new unique approach of your own.

I have been reffing OD&D since early 1974 and have 16 games to go to reach 4000 games in the main campaign and I can tell you that there is no end to the campaign and the surprises and the new ideas. When I pass on, some of my descendants and some of my friends (the original players) descendants will continue the campaign, hopefully from generation to generation.

[The Archivist]

Apr 13, 2017 13:28:30 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Heh. You guys are something else... Right out of Alice in Wonderland...

Good D&D resource and inspiration that, especially if you like gonzo which we do.