Secrets of Blackmoor Documentary

[aldarron]

I haven't noticed any mention of this here yet, so have a look at the trailer for those who haven't seen it yet.

[Deleted]

Hey, aldy!

Good havard, of course, mentioned this in GD, already:

odd74.proboards.com/thread/12001/dave-arneson-documentary-trailer-revealed


I, too, had some contact with the filmmakers when the project was still in pre-production, back in 2014, and, honest to God, for some time it seemed like they weren't going anywhere with this. I am glad to see, though, that they seem to have overcome their difficulties, and so far could present something that seems to match their initial vision for the project. - Now, a trailer, of course, so far means little: For the movie to find proper distribution is the great art if you're an indie film guy. If this one, like "The Great Kingdom", the other doc about the origins of D&D, ends up only being shown at festivals (from what I gather), then I'll be very disappointed. ...But let's hope that won't be the case.


In case you, or anyone else, wonder, BTW: My own present lack of involvement with anything related to BM, these days, stems not from whatever sort of imagined dissonance, or whatever. I'm still a fan, and I am still looking very much forward to what happens to this, and a couple of other projects. That I took a step away from the setting originates mainly in that, for quite some time, it seemed like serious news that Mark Rein-Hagen was going to somehow license the Blackmoor brand, and do something big with it. (Not sure how that one turned out, BTW.) Since that would likely have left less room for very autonomous, and very free interpretations of the setting like I like to do, and since the news broke around a time when I was pondering whether to run the long-proposed LFC-sequel, or to do something completely different, that kind of ended up becoming the deciding factor. - Like, I'm not saying I'll "never" do anything again, but since the Arneson estate, in general, seems more involved than was the case a few years back, I also don't think it's a bad idea as a pure fan to take a step back, and let them do their thing.

The movie project certainly seems like a step into the right direction.

[Deleted]

Hey guys.
We've been working away. It's been 5 years now.

We expect to have the first film done in the next few months and are negotiating with a PBS station to use it as a pledge program. We also have a distribution company that is approaching international markets for TV distribution.

We just released our first T-shirts which you can purchase here: store.secretsofblackmoor.com/

The T-shirt art is by none other than Bob Bledsaw, and shows his vision of Blackmoor castle with Gerti the Dragon out and about, which is so fitting considering he worked on the First Fantasy Campaign module as a teen.

[derv]

Due to the move of bringing this to the more widely used platform of Amazon I have finally watched the documentary. Even though I would have preferred that it had simply presented the activity and contributions of Arneson and the TC crowd without the idea that it's a suppressed secret, I did enjoy the film. I'd like to see SOB be able to proceed with the second film. How about you?

Consider this a bump for this thread and an encouragement to go watch the flick on Amazon or Vimeo if you haven't already. It's $3, the cost of a cup of coffee or glass of beer.

One thing that occurred to me as I listened to these guys describe what it meant to roleplay was whether the use of a caller changed the dynamics of the game. It doesn't seem to be in use in the early games that relied on interaction and input from each player. Solutions were arrived at through dialogue with a rational argument for actions and outcomes and the ref being the final arbiter. They are tracing a line from wargames to Braunstein to Blackmoor where such roleplay activity is already happening. What's your take?

[Deleted]

I contributed to the Kickstarter and have my DVD, but I got impatient waiting for it and rented the movie on Vimeo a while back. I'm glad the DVD finally got here, though, for the extra features. I enjoyed the long form interviews in "Extras" more than the actual documentary, for my tastes. The editing, pacing, music and as you said agenda threw me off a bit in there, but in the extras I enjoyed just listening to the various personalities reminisce about their gaming experience and their connections to Dave Arneson. IMO far more interesting and useful than the all-too-serious tone of the narrator and the million shots of the smokey gaming table. Great footage, strangely compiled and edited, would be my review of this film.

[derv]

I can't say that there was a lot of new information for me. What I liked the most was some of the commentary by Randy Hoffa and Greg Scott. There personalities were a fresh addition to the others. I'm not sure that their part in the story was made that clear in the doc though. From a sentimental angle, because I'm a softy, I also appreciated the interviews with Arneson's dad.

Supposedly part 2 would include more nitty gritty of the games. So, I'd like to see that happen.

[thegreyelf]

My take is about the same as the folks above. I very much enjoyed it (own the blu-ray and have watched it a couple times) but really could've done without the agenda of "There's a conspiracy to bury Dave's contributions".

[dicebro]

I wonder if any of those who critique the movie (for good or bad) have ever actually worked on one? Forgive me for being biased (I backed the KS), but I am amazed that these wonderful interviews were published. 100% satisfied with the outcome! Kickstarters are not easy. Whole movies are even more difficult, even when you start out with a wealthy production company. How many attempts at making a movie that tells the story of what happened in the days before D&D have failed? Uh, how about all of them? I’m looking forward to Part two.  Sorry for the rant, but I feel good about this thing. Note that This post is not specifically aimed at anyone. Everyone who has seen the movie should give a critique and I love reading all of them. I’ve never worked on a creative project of this magnitude. But I can imagine the risks involved. I salute the team that put it together.

[derv]

Part of the reason I bumped this thread is because I appreciate the effort SOB put into this project. It is a small attempt at offering them the support that they requested in getting the word out. I think their move to offer it through Amazon was a good one. People should go see the movie.

That being said, it is my opinion that the interviews and testimony of the original players could have stood all on their own. I actually think they would have spoken louder and to a broader audience without the ideological Gygax/Arneson wedge.

It's important and there is value in these sort of things being said by those who watched the doc before (and if) a second production is created. It's up to SOB to determine if there is any credence to the claims. If there is, adjustments can be made and the next one can be that much better.

[terje]

I watched it on vimeo a couple of weeks ago and really enjoyed it. Hoping for a sequel!

[Deleted]

In case anybody wonders after the kerfuffle we had with the movie crew, especially last year - I've already come out a couple of times saying that I generally enjoyed the movie. I'm not aware of any fundamentally negative criticism of it either. I remember, though, that the first version of the movie released on Vimeo about a year ago had some outright terrible sound mixing issues, of amateur quality, like the soundtrack being significantly louder than the respectively depicted speakers' voices. Now, that was fixed with some of the movie's later, more complete releases, so no reason to create drama about it; that's also what Kickstarter is supposed to be for, after all - to help indie developers get their stuff out, and to give them room to field-test their products according to public feedback.

Content-wise, I thought the movie lacked a certain focus, and a certain "warmth", but I am also aware that this comes with the territory: The movie makers try to tell the entire story of D&D and the St Pauls group, and that requires them to cover a lot of topics - and "voices", meaning people - in a very condensed fashion. This is less a movie about "The Secrets of Blackmoor", as it is a movie about "the general environment in which the Blackmoor campaign took place, with all the sociocultural background included". That's a little bit disappointing, as the movie is surely advertised in a different manner - but again, the case can be very reasonably made that this is necessary ground work to establish a conversation about a very complex topic that most viewers likely don't know anything about. I do not agree about the whole Strategos N angle, but I'm glad the movie takes the time to introduce the idea, and to spend some time with David Wesely, instead of outright jumping into the tale of the origins of TSR.

I think the movie noticeably suffers from trying to make a comment on the GIER* and the TIM** debates that the hobby has been witnessing over the last few years; it should not bother with it to the degree it does, as that kind of stuff never ages well. However, I realize this was also necessary because it's such a fundamental part of the narrative frame that is usually used to explain anything related to the history of D&D - you have to debunk it, or you can't really go on with things. That Mr Gygax and people associated with his estate have made a lot of untruthful and false statements about the origins of D&D is hardly the fault of the respective researchers.

My general verdict is - mixed, but by no means negative. I think it will take the promised sequel to "bring things home for me". I'm pretty bummed that the movie only teased Arneson's own voice, as Arneson is the one I want to hear from the most in a movie supposedly dedicated to his creations and to his memory. However, the absence of these things doesn't, by itself, lower the quality and worth of the material presented to the viewers so far. And that material is generally good, and makes for a solid introduction to the overall topic. It's just plainly great someone took the chance to interview many of the people in this stage of their lives. (And no, by that I don't mean "before they die", but "while they are still in touch with the hobby themselves" and "while D&D is still a thing".)


Now, I wanted to write two or three lines and have ended up writing this little essay - so, full disclosure: I was involved in the movie's pre-poduction research phase - I guess that's the proper way to phrase it. I am listed in the credits, together with my sources, as "Rafael and the Company of the Maiden". That said, I think my overall influence on the movie has been rather small - I very much doubt the validity of the theory that postulates "Strategos N" as a main source for D&D, for example, as I said above. But of course, if only for my other friends' sake, I've surely tried to do my part to make this project happen, all along the way.

That said, I want to be absolutely clear that I was appalled and severely disappointed by the online behavior of the movie crew, especially over the course of last year: That the movie producers eventually managed to get themselves banned on, to the best of my knowledge, all major oldschool message boards and social groups, despite the success of the movie, was was plainly weird and unsettling. The interpersonal drama took a lot of attention away from the movie that would otherwise have been well-deserved. That way, the producers themselves hurt their own operations more than anyone else could have possibly done. And given that the movie, regardless of their personal antics, ended up actually being quite good, that's a bloody shame.


---


*"Gygax Invented Everything Renarration": Shortened GIER, the German word for "greed", a narrative that claims that Gary Gygax was the driving force behind ALL of 1970s gaming culture, from Blackmoor, over RuneQuest, to Traveller and Tekumel. Established around the year 2000, after TSR/WotC snubbed Mr Gygax when they brought some oldschool icons back into their company to promote 3e. Primarily used to promote the later unfinished, and largely ghost-written "Castle Zagyg" as the supposedly "pure" oldschool experience, in contrast to "impure" oldschool experiences, like "Living Greyhawk" and the 2004 Blackmoor remake. Not a sustainable theory or talking point in the eyes of any even semi-serious hobby historian.


**"Totally integrally misunderstood": Shortened TIM, after a guy who did an internship at TSR for one summer. The strange, eyebrow-rising phenomenon that many of us believe to have been witnessing concerning the former members of team GIER since around the death of Mr Gygax: Because, to many TIMs, it seems that in the moment Mr Gygax died, he evidently stopped inventing D&D - and Mr Arneson started inventing it. And now, ten years later, it might even seem to some of those that once proudly carried the banners of GIER that Mr Arneson has grown from "a malignant toad" into a "true genius". Hobby historians have expressed wonder about this phenomenon, and attribute it to a form of "climate change".

[waysoftheearth]

Jun 11, 2020 22:54:49 GMT -6 @rafael said:

Hobby historians have expressed wonder about this phenomenon, and attribute it to a form of "climate change".

LOL

[Piper]

I watched it a few weeks ago. As a rule I'm not a fan of documentaries but I did enjoy the interviews with the original Blackmoor players. It didn't leave me clamoring for more but, as I said, I'm not a big fan of documentary films.

[muddy]

I watched it maybe a month ago, and enjoyed it. Most interesting for me were the steps along the way from war games needing a ref to free form "what do you do?" play with a DM. I'd probably watch it again just to keep an eye on that, and will watch the next in the series, if there are any.

[Deleted]

Jun 12, 2020 1:02:19 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

Jun 11, 2020 22:54:49 GMT -6 @rafael said:

Hobby historians have expressed wonder about this phenomenon, and attribute it to a form of "climate change".

LOL

I'm not usually such a meanie, but I think these guys deserve "hell by acronym". One of the undoubtedly positive things the SOB movie does is that it lets us see how friendly, educated, and grounded the different members of the St Pauls group are. That's such an important impression to transmit, among all the online drama about "the usual suspects". Not all first-hour witnesses are of the "old man yells at cloud" quality, and it's important that people see that. D&D has the very worst trajectory among all RPGs when it comes to involving its pioneer generation, and it's because the individuals in question behaved incredibly antisocial. Things don't have to be like that, and the St Pauls group is an important example for "true" oldschoolers remaining involved in the hobby that don't fall into the "drunk yeller" category.

[thegreyelf]

Jun 13, 2020 7:03:55 GMT -6 @rafael said:

Jun 12, 2020 1:02:19 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

LOL

I'm not usually such a meanie, but I think these guys deserve "hell by acronym". One of the undoubtedly positive things the SOB movie does is that it lets us see how friendly, educated, and grounded the different members of the St Pauls group are. That's such an important impression to transmit, among all the online drama about "the usual suspects". Not all first-hour witnesses are of the "old man yells at cloud" quality, and it's important that people see that. D&D has the very worst trajectory among all RPGs when it comes to involving its pioneer generation, and it's because the individuals in question behaved incredibly antisocial. Things don't have to be like that, and the St Pauls group is an important example for "true" oldschoolers remaining involved in the hobby that don't fall into the "drunk yeller" category.

You know, I honestly think a lot of it comes down to two factors--and this is not to excuse it in any way, but to understand where it comes from.

First, these guys are universally part of a senior generation that is becoming less and less respected with each passing year. The millennial and Gen Z generations (and this is not a personal attack on anyone here, but a statement of general, overall attitudes--certainly major exceptions exist) have become the first generation to overwhelmingly treat seniors as though they're something in their way, not to be respected, but to be put away somewhere. It doesn't help that many of them hold social attitudes that are also considered outdated and even insulting and offensive to modern sensibilities, and we as a society tend to be, shall we say, less than understanding of outdated social ideas these days. So that becomes more fodder to dismiss them out of hand. We tend to think, "Their ideas are invalid, offensive, and stupid, and they just need to get with the times and change the way they've thought their whole lives or we don't have time for them."

This dismissive attitude towards the elder generation has caused a great deal of bitterness among seniors, who believe (rightly so, in many ways) that they have valid wisdom to impart and valid stories to tell. As we see in SOB, when they are given the opportunity to tell their stories and people show they care, their attitudes change significantly.

Second, these guys were once paragons of the hobby. They were THE PEOPLE, the ones everyone looked to for guidance, insight, and leadership. Now, they're out to pasture. By and large, the gaming industry has passed them by and their ideas are seen as quaint at best, outmoded and invalid at worst.

[Deleted]

I disagree with you here, my friend. I don't think the situation you describe applies to my previous criticism, at all:

The general disdain and neglect that some of these former oldschool paragons now have to face is one they earned through their own actions. We don't have to discuss these respective actions in detail, but I think that's pretty much evident and undeniable. There's not prejudice or disconnect on the side of their intended audiences - I'm writing this on a board dedicated to their memory, and we're exchanging these opinions in a thread about a major (?) movie dedicated to their memory, after all.

But there's a disconnect on the side of some of these older veterans of the hobby: Many of them have plainly abused the attention they were granted by the RPG community. This has limited their audience, and this has limited their business operations and otherwise options. Understandably, they're unhappy about that - but that's their problem, not the one of their intended customers. And it sure isn't about them being old.

The St Pauls group doesn't belong to these "some", that's the whole thing about it. Many members of the St Pauls group have remained active in the hobby, many of them have run fairly high-profile business operations in the hobby. Yet, none of them have, to best of my knowledge, have been involved in any kind of drama, especially not online.

I'm not going to go as far as to say that it's a matter of having a certain class, but it's definitely a matter of perspective: The St Pauls guys are not in the internet dogfight for followers, just to name one example. So, they are generally less likely to lose themselves over some perceived controversy.

[thegreyelf]

Yes, and I'm saying that I think the behavior of those people have come about BECAUSE of the dismissive nature of the current generation of gamers towards old people who they consider outmoded, unimportant, and "in the way." By and large it was angry lashing out. That's not to excuse it; certainly many folks have made the bed in which they lie. But it does a disservice to state that they somehow acted in a vacuum. They didn't.

That said, we can agree to disagree, and yes, there's no need to mention names or create prejudice, especially given the nature of the forum.

[Punkrabbitt]

thegreyelf, I think being dismissive of the older generations started in the 1960s with the "don't trust anyone over 30" ideals. By the 1980s, nursing homes were a booming business as people looked for ways to get their older family members out of the way. Since then, it has simply become increasingly acceptable in society.

[Deleted]

Just to be clear: I absolutely respect your opinion/point of view, there, thegreyelf. The pitfalls of this moderator job is that I usually focus on the drama, and not on the "general vibes", so my perception might be somewhat distorted. I wonder, though, if your perception is really a valid one, though: At least on the internet, most people that are considered "personae non gratae" today started quite strong. DF, ENWorld, RPGNet all celebrated their presence, and dedicated threads and entire sections to them in the beginning, just to name a few examples. Being European, my insight into the real-life events in the US have surely been quite limited, but wasn't this an extension of the overall treatment of former "Golden Age" RPG pioneers in the industry, and in the convention scene, back then?

Again, without naming names, I'm not debating the validity of your statement in terms of whether it applies to overall society; in my own impression, you're wrong there, too, but that is only my personal observation: I'm a non-British European, and the cross-generational conflict is less extreme here than it seems to be in English-speaking countries right now. - But with regards to the RPG scene and the RPG industry, I respectfully don't think your opinion is valid, at all, especially when we look at the most prominent examples of oldschoolers falling out of grace in recent years. - And before we get into a very uncomfortable debate that I would personally liken to "Monday Morning Quarterbacking", let's be clear what we're talking about here:

One of the more recent, more prominent examples of another oldschool paragon rage-quitting the scene involves that individual writing a letter to a regional chamber of commerce in the US to complain about the son of a dead friend taking "guest of honor" status from him at a convention. He does this within the context of massive public outrage and discontent over some really bad personal conduct and business practices he himself had showed. My question here would be two-fold: First, how does that nameless oldschool paragon think this latest action will, in any way, better his situation? And second, of course, how does this person's case serve as an example of "ageism" playing a role in these recent kerfuffles?

[doublejig2]

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage rage against the dying of the light (a stanza from Welsh poet: Dylan Thomas). 

...
For somewhere beckons the terrible alien eminence called, Egg of Coot.  

[thegreyelf]

@rafael, I didn't realize you were European (and non-English speaking). Equally respectfully, and especially in the RPG industry, I think you're wearing blinders.

Admittedly, it's possible (and even extremely likely) that things in Europe are far different than in the U.S.

Still, I'd go so far as to say it's a documented FACT that the millennial and Gen Z generations as a whole (with obvious exceptions) disrespect and view the senior generation, across the board, as someone to be put out to pasture, and at best ignored, at worst to be chastized and dismissed, whose attitudes are again at best, outdated, and at worst, abhorrent, without any effort to understand and account for the experiences and social worldview in which they were engendered. I see it every day and indeed, have written extensive articles about it in my day job as a web content writer. It's well-documented, the treatment to which seniors are subjected to, and the disrespect they endure. It's doubly so in the RPG industry, which is desperate these days to consider itself somehow "forward thinking."

I would, in addition, argue that said personages began in an industry dominated by Gen X, which while it has its problems, was raised to respect its elders and to value their experience. That changed measurably with the subsequent two generations, who now dominate the hobby and who in general have a great disdain for elders. If you need proof of this, simply see "OK, Boomer," which I myself have been subjected to, and I'm only in my mid-40s.

Again, this is NOT to excuse the behavior of the pricipals in question: they made their beds and they have to lie in them, and deservedly so. Still, it's essential that we as a society understand the societal circumstances under which these events occur. Angry lashing out which results in inappropraite behavior may not be forgivable, but it is understandable. And understanding it may, we can hope, prevent other similar incidents in the future.

Indeed, I myself had an experience to back this up. I had one of these former paragons of the industry pretty violently lash out at me on social media. I PMed him to tell him that I greatly respected his work and contribution to the industry, and felt that his lashing out was from some sort of misunderstanding, and that it had been unnecessary. He and I have had a great relationship ever since then.

I suspect, however, that you and I are going in circles at this point so it's probably best to let this particular sleeping dog lie, rather than continue to skew the course of the discussion, which should focus on the documentary. I think we both very much agree that while a strong documentary, it could've done without the obvious "Anti-Arneson Conspiracy" agenda.

[Deleted]

I get where you're coming from. Thing is, this is really mostly a US/English-speaking culture phenomenon, mostly in one specific aspect: Teenagers and young adults elsewhere don't get the kind of voice they've lately been getting in English-speaking countries, specifically in the US. I'm grossly oversimplifying, of course, and I want to make sure it's clear that I'm not referring to any current events, but really talking in very general terms. Say, for example, to return to the roots of this discussion, RPGNet, while still a formidable resource for RPG-related material, has been really hard to read over the last few years when it came to what people refer to as "Social Justice" issues:

It's not even that I would disagree with most of what's written there - it's that it's most teens and tweens telling more seasoned adults how to manage things, while at the same time virtue-signaling towards each other. That is as toxic an inhibiting an atmosphere as it can possibly be, about anything, really - people six months out of high school doing the rounds armchair-coaching. And, sure enough, woe is to the pitiful "real" adult that starts to try and reason with them. - This, too, is, in my mind, a phenomenon mostly at home in the US, if only because in non-English speaking Western countries, it's considerably harder to make an impact (and a living) through the use of social media.

That all said - we are both in agreement that most, if not all of the oldschool paragons we talk about cannot blame this situation for their continuing misfortunes: They screwed up quite independently of any response to any social movement, and for their own reasons. Particularly in the oldschool community, "SJWs" that rage against the patriarchy while daddy pays their dorm room are rather hard to find, if only because you can't really be "oldschool" if you're still, well, "in school".

One of the reasons, to finally bridge this topic with the movie, why I was unhappy that the "Anti-Arneson" angle was present in the movie, and is likely to return in the intended sequel, was precisely because it plays to the media environment we have today: It allows people to weaponize the story and its circumstances to a degree that noone can possibly measure yet. - And I'm not talking at all about the kids from Kotaku going to roast themselves some Gygax, I'm talking about the usual social vultures that try to use modern tactics now to retell things in a way that makes them look better. Personally, what I'm waiting for, is the first of the TIMs and the GIERs to show up and report to the mildly interested public that, yes, he, like "Black Leaf", was emotionally abused by his dungeon master, and that's really the reason for all the mistakes he or she would go on to make along the way.

I should say, there have already been attempts to do so. - I'm not saying this in a vacuum, so to speak. I have an idea what the future will bring here, and I'm not too happy about it.

[thegreyelf]

I can't really argue with any point you make there. Like I said, I do suspect (and you confirmed) that it's largely a phenomenon unique to the U.S. I have very close friends in places like Croatia and the UAE who by age are solidly within the Millennial generation and they, having lived in the U.S. for awhile, have a hardcore disdain for the way that generation behaves over here. I'm self-aware enough to know that I'm somewhat alienated from cultures outside of the U.S. and absolutely do hold ethnocentric views, which I sometimes (probably too often) mistakenly believe are "universals". It's something I work hard on every day and I always appreciate education from those outside this country.

But yeah, I pretty much agree with everything you said there.

[Finarvyn]

I'm a little hesitant to jump in, as Rafe and Jason are getting pretty deep into issues where I feel I have little expertise. However...

I think that what makes this so pertinent to the RPG industry, and D&D in particular, is that "the system" itself has spent a lot of time trying to forget the older generation and "free itself" from ties to the folks who came before. AD&D was written, in part, to remove Arneson from the equation. 2E was done, in part, to remove Gygax. 3E broke free from TSR. Each of those editions were written to refine the rules and include newer ideas and innovations, but they were also done with the intent of distancing the current rules from previous creators. It's no surprise that previous creators (and friends or colleagues of same) would resent being removed from the scene.

This may be a societal thing, or it may simply be a TSR-WotC thing. My son is 28 and he has heard of both Gygax and Arneson, but his knowledge of them is minimal and he prefers 5E to OD&D hands-down. I believe he respects his elders (me) when it comes to game theory and discussion, but he has little interest in the history of the hobby. When I got to sit at Jim Ward's Metamorphosis Alpha table at GaryCon a few years back I was totally thrilled to get to interact in person with a legend of the hobby, but I suspect that had my son been present he would have had little interest because he doesn't know the part that Ward has played in how D&D got to where it is now. So is that more of a societal thing or a result of the way the hobby has continually cut ties with its creators?

I love to see the old timers in the Secrets of Blackmoor video, but I also like to hear from them on message boards and the like. (I'm sort of bummed that many of them no longer post here.) I love the old stuff, but I'm not sure if it's because of nostalgia or a love of history or if I'm from a "respect your elders" generation. Sadly, a few data points don't make a pattern.

What I will say is that when I talk to the folks who played at Dave's table, or Gary's table, the game they describe is a lot more like the one I remember from the 70's than the one I see being played today. I don't want to say that it's better now, or that it was better then, but the two games are highly different in philosophy. There is a lot out there about gaming today. I'd like to see more about gaming then.

Just my two coppers, probably not so much on topic when I'm done.

[thegreyelf]

Well said, and I couldn't agree more.

[derv]

I don't think the sociological influences are that hard to understand when you are looking at generational divides. Yet I think the problem isn't quite that complex when it comes to D&D. It seems as if there is a disconnect in understanding in what each group is talking about when they refer to what it means to roleplay. There were divides that existed from day one after the publication of OD&D. It's completely dependent on how you were introduced to the game and your previous background in gaming. Language is not always sufficient in explaining this when it comes to the "how" it's different, primarily because we are using the same terms to mean different things. Demonstration is necessary. As a result of misunderstanding, I think, we have gotten some resentment on both (all) sides.

Take for instance Braunstein. It seems as if there is a real curiosity about this game. Not so much about how it came to be, though that is important and interesting, but about how it's played. Often people that are asking "how" are being given unsatisfactory answers- go play a game with Wesely, read my posts, bugger off, I've answered this question a hundred times, just wing it. The reality is that there are some common criteria and they're not that complex. I pretty much got tired of this back and forth dialogue. That's why I put together Kieselstein.

If you want understanding you have to do a little more than inform or argue, you have to educate.

edit: I should add that I don't think the younger generation really gives a rip who was the first at any of this stuff. They simply want to know "how" it was done.

[Deleted]

Jun 19, 2020 4:42:51 GMT -6 thegreyelf said:

I can't really argue with any point you make there. Like I said, I do suspect (and you confirmed) that it's largely a phenomenon unique to the U.S. I have very close friends in places like Croatia and the UAE who by age are solidly within the Millennial generation and they, having lived in the U.S. for awhile, have a hardcore disdain for the way that generation behaves over here. I'm self-aware enough to know that I'm somewhat alienated from cultures outside of the U.S. and absolutely do hold ethnocentric views, which I sometimes (probably too often) mistakenly believe are "universals". It's something I work hard on every day and I always appreciate education from those outside this country.

Thanks, man. I don't want to write all too much on the topic, because it~s such a multi/faceted topic, but I can echo the opinions of the friends that you quote: Between Twitter culture and 24-hour news networks, it appears like the people in the US have forgotten how to communicate at a more modest wavelength. I hope this will change somehow, because right now - and without positioning myself within your political spectrum that way - it's quite hard to creative positive discourse, between all the taboos and trigger points that American conversation is framed with, lately. To us here, this mainly translates by posters being terribly touchy, even seasoned veterans. Everything is always a matter of life and death, and everyone is always either angry or miffed by default. That's not how you create things, that's how you bring them down.

Jun 19, 2020 7:09:34 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

This may be a societal thing, or it may simply be a TSR-WotC thing. My son is 28 and he has heard of both Gygax and Arneson, but his knowledge of them is minimal and he prefers 5E to OD&D hands-down. I believe he respects his elders (me) when it comes to game theory and discussion, but he has little interest in the history of the hobby. When I got to sit at Jim Ward's Metamorphosis Alpha table at GaryCon a few years back I was totally thrilled to get to interact in person with a legend of the hobby, but I suspect that had my son been present he would have had little interest because he doesn't know the part that Ward has played in how D&D got to where it is now. So is that more of a societal thing or a result of the way the hobby has continually cut ties with its creators?

People usually play what they consider interesting in terms of story and otherwise content, and what their friends play. Rules are only a third element in that process of decision-making, and "implications with gaming history" probably don't even take the fourth place among what people consider generally important when they choose a new game. Choosing an old game is like going to classic movie night, or choosing an older phone over a new one: People will do it if they are really, really interested in something. But their natural drive is always going to be towards the more modern, the more socially relevant thing.

What I will say is that when I talk to the folks who played at Dave's table, or Gary's table, the game they describe is a lot more like the one I remember from the 70's than the one I see being played today. I don't want to say that it's better now, or that it was better then, but the two games are highly different in philosophy. There is a lot out there about gaming today. I'd like to see more about gaming then.

Well, we tried, Fin. But there also needs to be a certain willingness among the older generation of gamers to play along; most of the folks who've come here over the years, they were extremely complicated to deal with. As frustrating as that is, it simply wasn't our mistake. Failed Kickstarters, broken promises to the community and, of course, all the ego-driven drama did that, well by themselves. I'm sad that many of the old guard have left our corner of the web, but the way they tended to behave with everyone who even came near to them, I frankly don't want them back.

[thegreyelf]

Jun 20, 2020 8:15:35 GMT -6 derv said:

Take for instance Braunstein. It seems as if there is a real curiosity about this game. Not so much about how it came to be, though that is important and interesting, but about how it's played. Often people that are asking "how" are being given unsatisfactory answers- go play a game with Wesely, read my posts, bugger off, I've answered this question a hundred times, just wing it. The reality is that there are some common criteria and they're not that complex. I pretty much got tired of this back and forth dialogue. That's why I put together Kieselstein.

Ayup. I got this EXACT THING when I posted a thread about whether the Braunstein rules were ever published anywhere. TONS of "Bugger off," "read my other posts," and "I've answered this a hundred times," when I actually did a search, but there are thousands of posts on this board to go through, and the last it was addressed, so far as I could tell, was a few years before I asked the question, during a period when I wasn't active on message boards much at all. I had to wade through far too much b.s. (and veiled accusations that I just was out to steal the game to publish it as my own) when in truth I was just curious about how the whole thing started and what it looked like. SOB finally showed me that.

[derv]

As Raf pointed out, that's what's unique about the St Pauls crew and why I think their testimony speaks all on it's own. There's something compelling when people who were there can talk about the game without feeling the necessity to point the spotlight on themselves and couch every explanation as if it revolved around them.