|
|
Post by aldarron on May 11, 2009 18:16:43 GMT -6
So I was looking through Stategic Review, Vol 1 no. 3 (autumn 1975) and see a carefully worded but condescending Editorial by Gary Gygax concerning a Mr. Arnold Hendrik, who had apparently written a review of D&D that Mr. Gygax didn't think much of and who more importantly perhaps was in the process of publishing a set of medieval warfare miniatures rules to compete with Chainmail. Well I never heard of Hendricks so I did some diging and lo and behold somebody has actually posted the review. How cool is that! Its an really interesting look at how someone in the wargaming community was reacting to D&D in its infancy. www-personal.umich.edu/~beattie/timeline/1972-1979/dd.gifBTW From what I can gather, Hendriks was a pretty well respected rules designer/wargamer. At least the later games he made seem to still have some fans. The medieval miniatures rule system was called Sword and Spear and he made a companion system called Ancient Warfare. |
|
|
|
Post by kenmeister on May 13, 2009 12:24:26 GMT -6
Thanks for the link. Play by phone, hah!
|
|
sham
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 385
|
Post by sham on May 13, 2009 12:59:50 GMT -6
Excellent find, aldarron.
Yes, clearly Play by Phone makes more sense than Play in Person. I wonder why Telephones weren't included on the Recommended Equipment list in Volume I?
|
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on May 13, 2009 14:10:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by kesher on May 13, 2009 15:23:41 GMT -6
I would like to point out that the Acolyte Dorn was "well equipped...with mail, shield, spear and crossbow"... He didn't even try and turn them! What a noob!  |
|
|
|
Post by ragnorakk on May 13, 2009 19:50:03 GMT -6
Neat!
Now we're gonna have to look into Korn's "Modern Warfare in Miniature"...
|
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on May 13, 2009 20:19:35 GMT -6
Thanks for the link. Play by phone, hah! Yeah that one just blew my mind. I can only imagine that wargamers were so few and far between that Hendriks was assuming it would be a rare D&D group that could actually meet in person. It did make me think about what one might do with a webcam game though. It would definetly be interesting to know what the story is with that. I'm guessing it it had some kind of individual character rules (like you play a squad or platoon leader). Some of the military training manuals had exercises like that. Let us know if you find out! |
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on May 13, 2009 22:45:45 GMT -6
What blew me away was the reviewer's assertion that play in person was impossible.
Huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on May 14, 2009 13:21:52 GMT -6
I would be extremely interested in Gygax's response.
|
|
|
|
Post by coffee on May 14, 2009 15:31:56 GMT -6
What blew me away was the reviewer's assertion that play in person was impossible. Huh? My guess (and this is only a guess) is that the reviewer was only familiar with standard wargames. That is, the table is here, with the terrain laid out; you put your guys over there and I'll put mine over here. Now, when you have a dungeon to explore, you can't just show the players the whole table, already set up -- at least not if you want to surprise the players. If it's on the table they can see it; therefore it would be no surprise. Remember, this was a whole new game. But it was still being billed as a wargame. Thus the reviewer tried to assimilated it in that fashion. And he couldn't, which is why there weren't a whole flock of old wargamers that started playing D&D but rather mostly college students and their friends who started the groundswell. Anyway, that's my take on it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2009 15:40:09 GMT -6
I would be extremely interested in Gygax's response. Back in the day EGG published some harsh responses to reviews such as this one in "The Dragon". Sometimes, they were focused on the amateur nature of the fanzines, others on how clueless the reviewer appeared to be about RPGs. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on May 14, 2009 16:04:51 GMT -6
I know; the original poster referenced one. Hence my interest  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2009 17:07:02 GMT -6
Ah! Apologies, I've lost the thread by this point. So he did.
|
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on May 17, 2009 15:21:24 GMT -6
Arnold Henrick was, I believe, the primary designer behind Heritage's miniatures rules like Knights & Magick. He also designer their Paint and Play sets like Caverns of Doom and Crypt of the Sorcerer (which I quite like). I think he later went on to work in the video game industry.
It's funny because those sets were also explicitly sold as being compatible with D&D! (I guess he finally figured out how to play. . .)
|
|
|
|
Post by kesher on May 17, 2009 19:46:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by vladtolenkov on May 19, 2009 0:33:17 GMT -6
Kesher:
Thanks for posting that link.
I printed those out a few months ago and it led me to toy with creating a clone version of the Heritage miniature rules which I was calling Dungeon Battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by klamath on May 19, 2009 11:09:52 GMT -6
I think that's exactly right. You can find a description of "Modern Warfare in Miniature" from Places to Go, People to Be at ptgptb.org/0015/retro.html It seems to have been a 'double-blind' game where the referee had the complete sand table in one room, while the 2 players sat in different rooms with their own maps. Oddly, I think there's a description of people playing it in one of the Whole Earth Catalogs from the early 1970s. I remember Sword and Spear fondly. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on May 19, 2009 12:19:07 GMT -6
So...anyone care to elaborate on Gygax's response??
|
|
|
|
Post by coffee on May 19, 2009 14:25:28 GMT -6
So...anyone care to elaborate on Gygax's response?? Not much to say really, aside from this one quote: He did go on to mention that the guy was selling his own games and invited readers to submit their reviews. But he took the high road on this guy and mostly ignored him. |
|
|
|
Post by grodog on May 19, 2009 21:42:09 GMT -6
I wasn't aware that the rules in the Heritage Paint & Play sets were this guy's work. Hmmm. Adds an interesting layer to reading them You can download most of the Heritage rules/inserts from www.dungeon-dwellers.info/Box_Set_Inserts.html |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on May 20, 2009 13:09:38 GMT -6
Not much to say really, aside from this one quote: He did go on to mention that the guy was selling his own games and invited readers to submit their reviews. But he took the high road on this guy and mostly ignored him. How disappointing. From the OP I deduced he'd torn the review apart. |
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on May 20, 2009 20:22:15 GMT -6
How disappointing. From the OP I deduced he'd torn the review apart. well.. more like the reviewer than the review. Actually after reading Gygax's editorial I expected a really negative review and was surprised that Hendricks review was actually fairly positive at times, even glowing. True he found plenty of faults and didn't reccomend it, but that was mainly because he saw it as a incomplete and in need of polishing - its clear he couldn't quite understand the game but loved the idea. I was particularly fascinated by how it all seemed so new and so full of possiblities to him. Among other things, Hendricks complained that the rules were vague, somewhat uneven, and sometimes difficult to follow, particularly for novice gamers. Well that's exactly why the game was expanded (AD&D) and rewritten so much (Holmes B/X etc.), so one can hardly fault Hendrick for being one of the first to observe the need to present the game in a more coherent and comprehensible fashion. Holmes, after all was motivated to write Basic Dungeons and Dragons for this very reason. In any case I'll give the first couple paragraphs of Gygax's response for those who don't have access and are curious (that means you Jason) The rest of the editorial is just about TSR review policies and such. "Donald Featherstone once said in WARGAMER’S NEWSLETTER that he believed Arnold Hendrick’s chief talent and claim to fame lay in his “pinching” of Fletcher Pratt’s Naval Wargame — alluding in all likelihood to similarities between Mr. Pratt’s game and the set of rules for naval miniatures authored by Mr. Hendrick. I concurred with what was said in WARGAMER’S NEWSLETTER, and when the good Mr. Hendrick “reviewed” CHAINMAIL in a highly uncomplimentary manner I ignored what was written, for surely most hobbyists could be assumed to be able to read this “review” for what it was worth and in light of Mr. Hendrick’s talents otherwise. As an example of the comments he made regarding CHAINMAIL, the most amusing was his assertion that heavy cavalry was rated too high, imagine! In a period where the armored horseman dominated the field of battle, heavy horse are too strong! Anyway, the learned Mr. Hendrick subsequently “reviewed” DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, again in a very uncomplimentary manner — after all, he had gone so far as to play a game of D&D as a Cleric, completely armed with such edged weapons as spear and arrows . . . Again, this so called “review” was so obviously inaccurate and biased that I ignored it completely, although numbers of letters and telephone calls from irate D&D fans who had read the comments and wished to let me know that the “review” outraged them assured me that Mr. Hendrick would not escape totally unscathed. Eventually the magazine which retains Mr. Hendrick as a “reviewer” did print a contrary opinion — how could they ignore a counter-article written by Mr. James Oden, President of Heritage Models, Inc.? This brings me to the point of this editorial. The axe that Mr. Hendrick has been grinding so loudly and long has been exposed. Possibly in light of TSR’s success in publishing miniatures rules and games, Mr. Hendrick has decided to begin peddling a line of his own creations. If these creations are as well-thought out as his “reviews”, as learned and clever, they will be rare products indeed...." |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on May 21, 2009 9:02:34 GMT -6
Hah. Thanks, aldarron! That's more along the lines of what I'd expected.
|
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on May 21, 2009 11:59:27 GMT -6
you bet. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on May 21, 2009 12:06:11 GMT -6
In fact, I exalt thee in thanks!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2009 23:10:46 GMT -6
"These booklets...at $3.50 each are priced rather high".
How much will an OD&D book fetch now?
|
|
|
|
Post by Grognard on Jun 9, 2009 0:00:17 GMT -6
Actually after reading Gygax's editorial I expected a really negative review and was surprised that Hendricks review was actually fairly positive at times, even glowing. True he found plenty of faults and didn't reccomend it, but that was mainly because he saw it as a incomplete and in need of polishing - its clear he couldn't quite understand the game but loved the idea. I was particularly fascinated by how it all seemed so new and so full of possiblities to him. I recently did a reread through Strategic Review up to about Dragon #80 or so, and plan to continue further soon. Usually I skip the reviews, letters, and such, as I'm concentrating on reading the magazine for gaming material/ideas, but I read that response by EGG and it really seemed negative. Reading the actual review though, I agree with you, the guy really seemed like he was wide-eyed at the potential of the thing but didn't quite get how it all worked together (understandable given the lack of organization and clarity at times in OD&D). Its too bad EGG didn't get together with the guy and run him through Castle Greyhawk. I bet the guy would have been hooked! Some of the negatives he thought the game had are actually considered to be positives now, heh. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Jun 9, 2009 9:40:02 GMT -6
"These booklets...at $3.50 each are priced rather high". How much will an OD&D book fetch now? A 5th print set on ebay with a completely smashed box and no reference sheets recently went for $47. I know because I bid $45 and some [EXPLETIVE DELETED] made one bid 30 seconds before the auction ended and sniped me  So that's roughly $15.67 per book. On the Amazon Marketplace I've seen them go from between $12 and $30 per booklet depending on printing and condition. |
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Jun 9, 2009 19:26:30 GMT -6
Curiousity killed the cat but never stoped me yet. According to the gov't website inflation calculator $ 3.50 in 1974 dollars is ..... $15.14 in 2009 dollars. Looks like the price hasn't gone up much. Taking Jasons average of about $ 20 a book that works out to $ 4.62 in 1974. Of course they were new back then!
|
|
scogle
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 69
|
Post by scogle on Jun 28, 2009 20:54:40 GMT -6
I suppose it's fair enough; it gives you an idea of how your typical wargamer might have looked at it, as opposed to D&D's later more diverse audience (which I suppose existed at that time too). Wargame rules might not've been quite so polished as they are now but, at least from my limited experience, they were usually fairly organized and sensible with only the occasional confusing point. The D&D rules are, as we know, totally chaotic, unorganized, sometimes even nonsensical, and probably would've seemed silly to people concerned with accurately reenacting historical battles and such. It also doesn't seem like he appreciated the potential of role-playing and whatnot, which is scarcely spoken of at all in the manuscripts, and the simple "tell the ref what you do and he'll tell you what happens" mechanics (which covered the vast majority of situations in those days sc.) would've only made it seem even less professional.
Just stating the obvious of course. Interesting stuff OP, have an exalt.
|
|
