Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2022 17:20:26 GMT -6
I like the Ultimate Toolbox as well. But if I want Gygax flavor I look first to his works. I like the Lazy DM series as well, exquisite for what it does, sure, but I find it lacking when it comes to world building and perhaps other than chewing gum depth. Better open up Tome of Adventure Design [as well]... that, and the myriad other resources awaiting the diligent plunderer of rules, settings, and milieu!  |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 7, 2022 19:29:46 GMT -6
I like the Ultimate Toolbox as well. But if I want Gygax flavor I look first to his works. I like the Lazy DM series as well, exquisite for what it does, sure, but I find it lacking when it comes to world building and perhaps other than chewing gum depth. Better open up Tome of Adventure Design... that, and the myriad other resources awaiting the diligent plunderer of rules, settings, and milieu! I forgot to mention Chaotic Shiny. Probably my favorite website next to this one. |
|
|
|
Post by Endless on Nov 7, 2022 22:42:38 GMT -6
I think by the last days of his tenure at TSR, Gary was already pretty off the hook with business strategy and even writing. He had the upstart of his fame, so everyone wanted to buy a Gygax product back then, but even then he was already lagging behind and his lasts products were, well, not really good.
I think it would have been great as some sort of CEO function, or creative director. His ideas and output would have worked wonders with the right group of writers/designers and good management, but TSR lacked heavily on that by its last days.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Nov 8, 2022 9:17:40 GMT -6
I wish Gary had stayed in control and it had remained a small company. D&D grew too big too fast for anyone at the company to handle. Today you could argue that the D&D brand is finally in the hands of a company that can handle success, yet the game now lacks the very "small company feel" that made D&D so good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Nov 8, 2022 19:24:44 GMT -6
Of course Gary should have remained in control of D&D throughout his lifetime! I can’t imagine what the downside could possibly have been. From 1974-1985, Gary wrote easily at least 70% of all noteworthy D&D products that were released by TSR. Obviously they were golden years for both TSR and Gary. From 1986-2008, I don’t think a single noteworthy new D&D product was released by TSR or WotC. The ouster was a complete and irreparable loss for our hobby.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 9, 2022 2:36:45 GMT -6
Of course Gary should have remained in control of D&D throughout his lifetime! I can’t imagine what the downside could possibly have been. From 1974-1985, Gary wrote easily at least 70% of all noteworthy D&D products that were released by TSR. Obviously they were golden years for both TSR and Gary. From 1986-2008, I don’t think a single noteworthy new D&D product was released by TSR or WotC. The ouster was a complete and irreparable loss for our hobby. The Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia was published in 1991. Arguably one of the best books TSR ever published. But I get your point. If I was to list my top 10 post-Gary books it would be (in no particular order and excluding 5th edition): Rules Cyclopedia Forgotten Realms Campaign setting for 3rd edition Ravenloft Domains of Dread The Art of Dungeons and Dragons Game (I could include all the Art Of books) Atlas of the Forgotten Realms Atlas of Krynn Dragonlance SAGA Bestiary Monstrous Manual 2e The Complete Villains Handbook 2e Castle Ravenloft 3e Do any of these rise to the level of Gary's best D&D books? Alas, the answer is a definitive no. The DMG alone outclasses any of these. Any of his best modules outrank any of these. Would these books have been better with Gary in the driver's seat? Well, that's kind of what we're discussing here. I dunno the answer to that. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 9, 2022 5:19:46 GMT -6
Rules Cyclopedia Dragonlance SAGA Bestiary Monstrous Manual 2e I thought I would comment on these three: (1) I've often said that the RC is the best single volume D&D book ever, but it's not because of the edition. It's because of the fact that they put it all together in one nifty hardback. This could have been done for OD&D, had TSR thought of doing it. And it would have been even better if the RC had capped everything at level 14 (essentially, a hardback of BX) instead of running through BECMI. A great book, but hardly a great innovation. (2) SAGA doesn't get enough good press. It was an innovative system and I liked it, even though I hardly ever played it. The Bestiary was good, but the boxed set and some of the other rules stuff was good as well. (3) Monstrous Manual 2E is one of my all-time favorite monster books, but I could have equally enjoyed the 1E Monster Manual if it had color pictures of the monsters. A great book, but not really a great innovation. So, two of the three that I liked from the list were just nicer editions. Most of the other products on the list weren't that interesting to me. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 9, 2022 14:03:02 GMT -6
Rules Cyclopedia Dragonlance SAGA Bestiary Monstrous Manual 2e I thought I would comment on these three: (1) I've often said that the RC is the best single volume D&D book ever, but it's not because of the edition. It's because of the fact that they put it all together in one nifty hardback. This could have been done for OD&D, had TSR thought of doing it. And it would have been even better if the RC had capped everything at level 14 (essentially, a hardback of BX) instead of running through BECMI. A great book, but hardly a great innovation. (2) SAGA doesn't get enough good press. It was an innovative system and I liked it, even though I hardly ever played it. The Bestiary was good, but the boxed set and some of the other rules stuff was good as well. (3) Monstrous Manual 2E is one of my all-time favorite monster books, but I could have equally enjoyed the 1E Monster Manual if it had color pictures of the monsters. A great book, but not really a great innovation. So, two of the three that I liked from the list were just nicer editions. Most of the other products on the list weren't that interesting to me. Surely those Art Of books are pretty tasty, no? And those atlases are wonderfully made. I never played SAGA, I just really like that Bestiary, it has a nice personal journal feel to it and the descriptions are exceedingly well written, though I confess to never having played that system. But you are right on about the RC. Every edition of the game should have been capped with such a tome. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Nov 9, 2022 15:20:19 GMT -6
It’s an illuminating list, tdenmark . I’m familiar with most of those products and like them well enough. But three of them (Atlas, Atlas, and Bestiary) are not even D&D-branded; five of them (Cyclopedia, MM2e, Bestiary, Art, Castle Ravenloft) are fundamentally repackagings of Gygax-era material, a decent chunk of it created by Gygax himself; one of them (Art) actually is Gygax-era; and honestly, not a single one of these has an impact on my gaming table. (I’m the kind of Dragonlance fan who likes the world and the books and the gaming products but has little desire to actually game there.) |
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Nov 9, 2022 16:06:22 GMT -6
I might be one of few to consider UA directionally a 1.5e, or something headed in that direction.
The tonal shift is evident in it, even if it was material consolidated from DRAGON.
Which is pertinent in a way, with one of the functions of DRAGON being to showcase divergence from the system without implementing the divergence in the official system itself.
UA seems to me to be a further manifestation away from the OD&D, taking the system into its more logical next form, in some way.
A power-leap forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 9, 2022 17:56:15 GMT -6
It’s an illuminating list, tdenmark . I’m familiar with most of those products and like them well enough. But three of them (Atlas, Atlas, and Bestiary) are not even D&D-branded; five of them (Cyclopedia, MM2e, Bestiary, Art, Castle Ravenloft) are fundamentally repackagings of Gygax-era material, a decent chunk of it created by Gygax himself; one of them (Art) actually is Gygax-era; and honestly, not a single one of these has an impact on my gaming table. (I’m the kind of Dragonlance fan who likes the world and the books and the gaming products but has little desire to actually game there.) The reason I didn't include any 5th edition is that several books from that edition would dominate the list. The 5e DMG is the best DMG since the original. Same for the 5e PHB and MM. They've done such a good job with the supplements for that line I have several favorites like Monsters of the Multiverse & Ghosts of Saltmarsh. I think the reason 5e was so good is it pushed the game forward by going back to the original editions, and refreshing the many great things from the history of the game. Rather than try to copy the latest thing - like how 4th edition tried to be a pen & paper version of World of Warcraft. So in that sense 5e owes a great debt to Gary Gygax. The more I learn about my favorite details in 5e the more I learn they were things gleaned from original D&D that already existed! |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 9, 2022 18:12:51 GMT -6
I might be one of few to consider UA directionally a 1.5e, or something headed in that direction. I thought everyone considered UA to be 1.5e As I've stated I'm fond of UA, but I think it is an indication that certain directions were wrong for the game, and are clues to what a future D&D by EGG might have looked like. In particular all the weird class, race, and level restrictions REALLY needed to go. 3e deserves kudos if for nothing else for tossing those out and rebalancing the game in different ways for that to work. At a core level there should be no reason a player can't have a Dwarf Illusionist or Drow Paladin or 12th level Halfling Fighter. Those should be setting specific restrictions, not core level. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Nov 9, 2022 22:47:42 GMT -6
The thing about 5e is that it came out well after Gary’s death, so IMO it falls well afield of the subject at hand.
As for class/race/level restrictions being weird, I would take the opposite view, in many respects. To me, Dwarf Illusionists and Drow Paladins and 12th level Halfling Fighters are weird, so the restrictions really serve to enforce the wanted milieu. And as a DM, it’s much easier to waive a restriction than to enforce one which is not present in the core. IIRC the 3.0 DMG states that the DM can bring back the restrictions if he wants to, but surely the players would revolt.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 10, 2022 0:08:13 GMT -6
The thing about 5e is that it came out well after Gary’s death, so IMO it falls well afield of the subject at hand. ok, you're right, I was just making the point some really good books have come out since Gary left TSR. As for class/race/level restrictions being weird, I would take the opposite view, in many respects. To me, Dwarf Illusionists and Drow Paladins and 12th level Halfling Fighters are weird, so the restrictions really serve to enforce the wanted milieu. And as a DM, it’s much easier to waive a restriction than to enforce one which is not present in the core. IIRC the 3.0 DMG states that the DM can bring back the restrictions if he wants to, but surely the players would revolt. What? Isn't it easier to say "in my campaign no Dwarf Illusionists" than the designers to say "no one can play Dwarf Illusionists, oh but if a DM really wants to they can figure out how to rebalance character creation to allow it. But why would you do that because I think it is weird?" So I would say it is harder to waive a restriction that is built into the game. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 10, 2022 4:57:34 GMT -6
Race/class/level restrictions are clearly a topic for a different thread, otherwise we totally derail this one. However, the intent is to put some balance into the options so that everyone doesn't play an elf or a dwarf. And with an implied setting cap in OD&D around level 10 for humans, level caps on non-humans aren't usually that significant. Yes, there are rules for playing higher levels, but I think that the assumption at the time is that most games would cap out around "name" level.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 10:44:07 GMT -6
Or, at least transition into realm builders in addition to adventurers.
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Nov 10, 2022 13:18:26 GMT -6
I think Gary, Rob, Tim, and the 3 Daves should have remained in charge of D&D.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 10, 2022 15:00:48 GMT -6
Race/class/level restrictions are clearly a topic for a different thread, otherwise we totally derail this one. However, the intent is to put some balance into the options so that everyone doesn't play an elf or a dwarf. And with an implied setting cap in OD&D around level 10 for humans, level caps on non-humans aren't usually that significant. Yes, there are rules for playing higher levels, but I think that the assumption at the time is that most games would cap out around "name" level. You're right. I'm derailing my own thread.  |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 10, 2022 15:01:23 GMT -6
I think Gary, Rob, Tim, and the 3 Daves should have remained in charge of D&D. Why? (I don't disagree, just wondering about your perspective) |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 10, 2022 15:17:57 GMT -6
I think Gary, Rob, Tim, and the 3 Daves should have remained in charge of D&D. Arneson and Magerry ... who is the 3rd Dave? (I'm sure I am just brain cramping)  |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Nov 10, 2022 16:38:01 GMT -6
Clearly, you don't know Barbie. How do you think she got her Malibu Dreamhouse? And her pink sports-car? And her fabulous wardrobe? |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Nov 10, 2022 16:57:22 GMT -6
Clearly, you don't know Barbie. How do you think she got her Malibu Dreamhouse? And her pink sports-car? And her fabulous wardrobe? So hard resisting an inappropriate joke here. I'm of the school that Gary nailed the 6 basic attributes with the just right amount of precision. No RPG has bested them: strength, intelligence, wisdom, dexterity, constitution, charisma. You could quibble, like constitution is a bit of a mouthful but what word describes that better? I used to think Charisma was a problem because it didn't specify if it was physical attractiveness. But as a general stat describing personal appeal it is perfect. So, comeliness was just unnecessary nonsense. Gary got it right the first time. Perhaps he was second guessing himself here, or letting fan criticism pushing him to add this, or he was just looking for content to fill UA with. And I think we see a history of this from OD&D to 1st edition where he went against his better instincts and caved in to the criticisms. Is that an indicator of how he might have governed D&D if he'd remained in charge of it? Yes, I think so. But I highly doubt he would have put in that Tanar'ri and Baator nonsense. I still can't even remember which is which. |
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Nov 10, 2022 17:56:52 GMT -6
I might be one of few to consider UA directionally a 1.5e, or something headed in that direction. I thought everyone considered UA to be 1.5e .... That's nice to hear. I was wondering how that observation would play out in the forum. |
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Nov 10, 2022 18:01:28 GMT -6
Maybe this is being nit-picky ... the question of the thread is should Gary have remained in charge of D&D.
So, does that mean he should have remained in charge of TSR?
I think that's a pertinent question, because inevitably, the business end will come back to the creative end and say things like, "we need a new edition, to spice things up," and that inevitably means the business will be in control, to some extent, of what the designers are able to do.
Gary was able to do what he wanted to do creatively, because early on, the owner was the designer.
How long could that last, really?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Nov 10, 2022 18:05:17 GMT -6
I think Gary, Rob, Tim, and the 3 Daves should have remained in charge of D&D. Arneson and Magerry ... who is the 3rd Dave? (I'm sure I am just brain cramping) DCS? I'm all for that. |
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Nov 10, 2022 18:22:38 GMT -6
I think Gary, Rob, Tim, and the 3 Daves should have remained in charge of D&D. Arneson and Magerry ... who is the 3rd Dave? (I'm sure I am just brain cramping) Cook? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 18:44:11 GMT -6
Hargrave++?
|
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Nov 10, 2022 20:07:10 GMT -6
Sutherland
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 21:18:39 GMT -6
AD&D MM 1e!
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Nov 11, 2022 6:35:30 GMT -6
Arneson and Magerry ... who is the 3rd Dave? (I'm sure I am just brain cramping) Cook? I'd be good with Zeb too. But he was not there at the beginning. |
|
