Lake Geneva Gaming Group?

Rob's games were distinct from Gary's though, and seem to have had folks who never played in Greyhawk, or who only did so rarely. It may be worth going through the 1976-1985 module credits, and checking the lists of playtesters, too, Havard, and then comparing them to the listed players from BC and LR. Might open a few more research nooks to explore....

"Might open a few more research nooks to explore...."

Have to say this... Why do some "researchers" always reflect in the 2nd person removed when the primary contextual evidence is available in raw form and in person (or an electronically worded simulacrum of such at least), namely, Me? Just ask.

Oh, now that would be amazing!

To answer the question of the original typed notes sent to EGG and which I had a chance to read then, I do not know if EGG's estate still holds them or not; nor do I know if Arneson's estate (as administered by his daughter) holds a copy or copies. A good person to ask this of in the latter case (outside of contacting Dave's estate) MIGHT be David Wesley, as well, or some of the original gamers in Dave's group (Swenson, Gaylord, Snider, etc.). I know nothing beyond this.

He's kidding, of course. This actually is the first time!

Philip: I have noted this at the LOTGD as well: EGG handed me the notes with a caveat, something akin to a warning. I read through them, in some spots struggled to do so, as they were not contiguous. They seemed loose condensations of what his group was using. There were formulas as I had noted at GENCON 2 or 3 when Strategos-N was being played (judge: Dave Wesley) and as I watched for some time with great interest then as I loved the period. I believe this is the first game at Gencon to use a computer which was set up next to the table and was used specifically for crunching such calculations. EGG came in at several points to mark my progress and interjected at one point that the whole had to be revised to be understood (I believe that he had made his decision right there and then to rewrite, which I might add in all of the days I had been privvy to playtests and their discussions I had never noted EGG do, and so forthrightly). I came away with virtually no understanding of a cohesiveness or structure to it at all, but it obviously made sense to Dave as he was judging it. It lacked proper examples and other guides, were partials, stream of conscious and IMO did never explain fully what we had experienced as 4 players with David Megarry in November 1972. Then again, David was using a certain form as understood, as most designers can do, and I don't believe that he had ever expected the stuff to see the light of day in print. That was my total take and there is very little else I can add to expand the matter beyond this. Asking Dave Wesley abut the integration of those formulas might be another track to pursue in the matter.

Thanks Havard. Nope. Read in context: "4 players with David Megarry". I am not going to criticize you too abhorrently (as I have seen others elsewhere making even greater/grosser leaps of logic and mistakes), but the assumption you make is by extracting some understood out of its context, as I said "with." That is: Megarry was a player, too--which is the only inference, as there is no specific mention to the contrary otherwise (One of my greatest concerns and peeves with true research, btw, and in that matter a big nod to David Witts for, IMO, maintaining the highest standards in that regard). Dave Arneson was the judge, and the other players were: EGG, Terry Kuntz, Ernie Gygax and myself. Megarry was the de facto leader as he understood the campaign area and rules and so he was our overall integration point in the adventure which took place on EGG's dining table. This has been recounted several times elsewhere on the net and in expanded form in an upcoming work of mine. Cheers!

So is this "upcoming work" the memoirs that you have posted about before? How are they coming? Any target dates yet established?

Yes, indeed. Very large work (raw estimate: 700 typed pages), expanding moreso as more memories and the need for elucidation occur in so many areas. I have no date for release because of this (ref: "when it's finished").

Rob, how often were player characters killed in your and Gary's Greyhawk campaign? We've all heard of the famous names of Mordenkainen, Robilar, and all the rest. These long-careered PCs make me wonder if PC death was relatively rare. On the other hand, perhaps there were lots of PCs in your campaign that never achieved fame because of early deaths.

Yeah. Mere verbal positioning by EGG, which I skipped in the matter as such. He wanted to draw in Wargamers and not alienate any who were primed to transition from Chainmail to an obviously different system; same as noting that the rules were useable with miniatures and promoted as such, even though we never used any ourselves in the playtests (these occur in other LG games of D&D, much later thought). Cheers!

Thanks for all the historical gems Rob, its a real treat, and definetly helps clear away the fog surrounding the foundation of our hobby!

Could be, could be. Fortunately most of the work on my vacations wasn't day-job work, but fun work, eh?



Thanks for the plug Rob.

Rob, I wonder if you have any recollections (and stats and the like, though that may be a reach) of your brother Terry's character - Terrik/Terric/whatever he was named, who was in on that first delve into Castle Greyhawk? I've seen him mentioned many times, but never in any detail.
Thanks.