|
|
Post by James Richardson on Oct 27, 2010 11:20:09 GMT -6
Where has this forum been all my life?
For some reason, I have quite an interest in the development of D&D prior to its publication. I suppose I'd ultimately like to be able to play the very first D&D-like game, although I realise it's more of an academic exercise than anything else, a bit like studying history or archaeology in lieu of actually being able to travel back in time.
So, there are a few threads here that I might post to. However, before I get stuck into one or two particular topics, there's one thing I'd really like to know. Is there somewhere where I can download scans of the surviving copies of Domesday Book? I haven't been able to find any on the Internet, and I have a sneaking suspicion that that's because they're not there.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Oct 27, 2010 12:06:22 GMT -6
For some reason, I have quite an interest in the development of D&D prior to its publication. I suppose I'd ultimately like to be able to play the very first D&D-like game, although I realise it's more of an academic exercise than anything else, a bit like studying history or archaeology in lieu of actually being able to travel back in time. Oh, I quite understand. That's part of why I created this forum in the first place.  there's one thing I'd really like to know. Is there somewhere where I can download scans of the surviving copies of Domesday Book? This is a tricky issue. There are very few copies of Domesday Book out there and the folks who actually have them have been very reluctant to make copies. Perhaps it's a matter of ownership of the IP, perhaps it's to maintain the collectable nature of them. Believe me when I tell you that many of us have been dying for a peek at these for years and it doesn't look like we'll see them any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by havard on Oct 30, 2010 18:03:14 GMT -6
I would also love to see those  -Havard |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Nov 3, 2010 23:06:15 GMT -6
Me too. I only have a vague knowledge of what it is. Count me in. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 4, 2010 4:28:32 GMT -6
Basically, the "Domesday Book" (other than the historical doc) was the newsletter of the original Castle & Crusade Society, which was composed of a number of miniatures wargamers in the pre-OD&D days. The newsletter had a maxiumum circulation of 80 at its peak, so issues are rare. Names associated with this newsletter are Rob Kuntz, Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, and the like -- the true originators of OD&D.
The newsletter is notable because it is supposed to have early Chainmail notes, an article or two about Dave's Black Moor game before OD&D came out, and similar types of impossible-to-locate stuff like that. I suspect that most of the content has little real use nowadays, but a couple of articles would be like gold to the OD&D historian.
Occasionally one of these will hit e-bay, but it's very rare since there were so few in the first place. Some issues are so rare that the acaeum.com (a D&D history board) doesn't even have a table of contents for those issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by havard on Nov 4, 2010 12:05:59 GMT -6
Arneson's own newsletter might be even more interesting.... -Havard |
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Nov 4, 2010 15:15:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by havard on Nov 4, 2010 15:40:45 GMT -6
Tell us more about Dave's newsletter, Havard. This is the first I remember hearing about it. I think this is where I first heard of it: www.acaeum.com/forum/about3888-20.htmlI dont know if this was limited to the Napoleonics/Brownstein or if it was something Dave continued doing the newsletter in the Blackmoor era. Maybe Greg can help us out on this -Havard |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2010 23:22:17 GMT -6
I am working on that with a friend who doesn't live too far away in Chicago. The idea is to get the pdfs out there as freely distributed, thus preserving the history of the game. This would not be welcome by some collectors of course, but the greater whole of history, IMO, precedes the matter of collectibilty. As well, due to the limited number of these ever printed, the chance that fans would actually be capable of purchasing one or more of these ultra-priced originals is just about nil, so the real issue with collectibility remains in the provence of those who collect and can afford the originals. Indeed, the interest generated by the release of the PDFs if I can get that to come to pass, would raise the interest in the originals, in my estimation, not lower this bar. --- RJK, Former King of the Castle & Crusade Society, Editor of Domesday Book issues #12, #13 and #14 (#14, was unpublished; stencils now owned by Frank Mentzer).
|
|
|
|
Post by James Richardson on Nov 5, 2010 2:31:00 GMT -6
Rob, that would be absolutely brilliant, if you could do it. Thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Nov 5, 2010 10:37:29 GMT -6
PDFs of those issues would be a tremendous gift to the hobby. I wish you best of luck on this project!
|
|
akooser
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 150 
|
Post by akooser on Nov 5, 2010 11:17:07 GMT -6
That would be great to see those books in electronic form!! |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Nov 5, 2010 11:26:49 GMT -6
I am working on that with a friend who doesn't live too far away in Chicago. The idea is to get the pdfs out there as freely distributed, thus preserving the history of the game. This would not be welcome by some collectors of course, but the greater whole of history, IMO, precedes the matter of collectibilty. As well, due to the limited number of these ever printed, the chance that fans would actually be capable of purchasing one or more of these ultra-priced originals is just about nil, so the real issue with collectibility remains in the provence of those who collect and can afford the originals. Indeed, the interest generated by the release of the PDFs if I can get that to come to pass, would raise the interest in the originals, in my estimation, not lower this bar. --- RJK, Former King of the Castle & Crusade Society, Editor of Domesday Book issues #12, #13 and #14 (#14, was unpublished; stencils now owned by Frank Mentzer). Godspeed, Rob! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2010 18:31:52 GMT -6
I promise nothing, of course, as the decision is my friend's alone, which would include his time scanning every issue he has and then making them available to me for commentary which I would add to the whole before publicly posting. I will update this probably in the new year and wil have some information by then, as my friend is a very busy person, very involved professionally and socially on many levels. -- RJK
|
|
|
|
Post by havard on Nov 6, 2010 4:46:04 GMT -6
This sounds really interesting Rob, I hope you will succeed in this project. It is unfortunate that the interests of collectors and those interested in the history of the hobby sometimes are in conflict, but as you say this might not always be the case. Havard |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 7, 2010 19:35:41 GMT -6
the greater whole of history, IMO, precedes the matter of collectibilty Well said! I believe that this should pertain to all aspects of history and not just gaming history. Imagine a country where no one could personally read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, but could only rely on the word of others. History should be for the masses, not an elite few. Good luck with the discussion with your friend on this issue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2010 17:57:11 GMT -6
That would be awesome. I hope it happens.
|
|
arcadayn
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 236
|
Post by arcadayn on Nov 13, 2010 7:35:02 GMT -6
This would be pretty amazing if you could pull it off Rob! I personally think the value of the issues would only increase with wider knowledge of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Nov 13, 2010 9:08:42 GMT -6
the greater whole of history, IMO, precedes the matter of collectibilty Well said! I believe that this should pertain to all aspects of history and not just gaming history. Imagine a country where no one could personally read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, but could only rely on the word of others. History should be for the masses, not an elite few. [soapbox] While I completely agree with your statement in principle, Fin, many collectors work to actively share historical and product information via the Acaeum, Tome of Treasures, and many other web sites. Broadly painting collectors with the "rich bastard anti-gamers" brush doesn't do anything to encourage those who do actively try to share research and information and to correct common misinformation/conventional D&D history wisdom (that, for example, the first edition of Chainmail didn't include the Fantasy Supplement, when it did). I'm not stating this because I'm offended at all by your comments or those of others in this thread, but I have seen many old schoolers slag collectors directly or indirectly in the past several years, and without collectors we would know much less about the history of the hobby, and its products, than we do today. [/soapbox] |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 13, 2010 18:21:15 GMT -6
Agreed, and I certainly don't want to throw mud at collectors. Heck, I paid several hundred bucks for a copy of Warriors of Mars because I valued its contents and wanted to look at them firsthand.
What I'd like to see somehow is an inexpensive information exchange without damaging the value of a collectable. For the folks who kept their copies of the Domesday Book newsletters, they have something with some real value to it. I don't want to take away that value, but I'd love to have a way to get ahold of the information contained therein.
As an example, I recently purchased the 3-volume set of the letters of Robert E. Howard. About $50 per volume. I doubt that the collectable value of owning an original Howard letter has suffered, but it's great to have a way to be able to get inside his head more by reading what he wrote, warts and all.
In the same way, I'm frustrated that WotC stopped selling PDF copies of OD&D. Many potential players don't want to spend hundreds of dollars for the real thing and would be happy with a cheap replica. When the PDFs were legally out there, I was still seeing white box and woodgrain box sets selling for decent money.
I guess, as with many topics, I have a split mind. Part of me wants the early days to be an elite club, but part of me wants to have everyone get a chance to experience it.
I certainly don't want to make collectors seem like the bad guy in all of this, and sorry if my post came off in that manner!
|
|
|
|
Post by havard on Nov 14, 2010 5:54:36 GMT -6
I think PDFs are an excellent sollution to this problem. Information needs to be shared in one way or another. While it could affect the value of collectibles, I think this will only be a temporary effect. Owning a pdf is not the same thing as owning the real physical copy. Good point about the Arcanum and similar sites where collectors do share lost lore Allan! -Havard |
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on Nov 14, 2010 6:54:26 GMT -6
> Information needs to be shared in one way or another. "Needs to be" is subjective, I guess? Anyhow... I'm looking forward to you banging on Gail Gygax's door and saying she /must/ share the precious information in her house. Or insisting that Rob must share all his information via .pdf. And freely, too. > While it could affect the value of collectibles, I think this will only be a temporary effect. For magazine like The Dragon, there's no need to "think". The effect has been permanent and negative. Of course, the majority of those were bulkier, lower value items but that is still a valid case in point to consider. > Good point about the Arcanum and similar sites where collectors do share lost lore Allan! "Fair use" provisions can go a bit further without riding roughshod over copyright legislation. Similarly, just having the raw material is no substitute for actually researching - per Allan's own site and others, for example - and indeed having large amounts of material "freely available" (and there are examples SF-side, to compare) might actually disincentivise people since there's no longer so much of a "thrill of the chase" to hunt down/compare/study which in many cases ends up carrying research-minded people /beyond/ the raw texts themselves. (By analogy, perhaps, just watching travel shows on TV vs. actually visiting a country on bicycle, say. Way too easy to turn couch potato given that choice...). |
|
|
|
Post by havard on Nov 14, 2010 7:33:30 GMT -6
> Information needs to be shared in one way or another. "Needs to be" is subjective, I guess? Needs of the individual are subjective, but I am talking about the needs of the gaming community I can see how my statement can be read that way, but I did not say freely. I have no problem paying a decent sum for an item. OTOH, it becomes problematic when you have an academic interest in the contents of a product, but cannot afford it because you have to compete with collectors to get your hands on said item. A dilemma worth considering. On the other hand, could it be that the prices for some collectable products are unreasonably high, when part of the market are not interested in the item itself, but simply learning of its contents? The dilemma with pdfs is ofcourse file sharing more than them being sold in itself. This is indeed extremely helpful. Interesting perspective. Personally I would think that the more available the sources are, the more people would be encouraged to do research, and would be able to do so. -Havard |
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on Nov 14, 2010 7:58:47 GMT -6
(that, for example, the first edition of Chainmail didn't include the Fantasy Supplement, when it did) Albeit that /was/ a "last minute addition" according to Gary. And well spoken on the rest, thank you, Allan. Unfortunately even with the potential from dedicated collectors/researchers, that can all be lost so easily; as witness the break up of Forrest Ackerman's archive (link ignoring the huge amount of history in magazines, fanzines, etc., of course); or, closer to home - even if on a much smaller scale - the plans of the likes of Mike Hurley & co. Even at best, it seems, if kept together rather better, such material ends up stuck in a "cold" university archive generally inaccessible to interested individuals and the mainstream of history. |
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 14, 2010 8:00:01 GMT -6
The position that archaeologist, historians and social scientists who focus on intellectual and material culture of the past hold regarding collector markets is well established and I won't delve into the arguments or turn this thread into a debate. I mention it only to raise awareness that there are very serious moral issues involved with any collector market, increasing exponentially with the amount of money involved, and the actions of some to tightly restrict/disrupt knowledge/experience over long periods of time solely for the sake of wealth.
There's few things that make an archaeologist cringe so much as when someone points at an artifact and asks "How much is it worth?"
|
|
arcadayn
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 236
|
Post by arcadayn on Nov 14, 2010 8:06:23 GMT -6
and indeed having large amounts of material "freely available" (and there are examples SF-side, to compare) might actually disincentivise people since there's no longer so much of a "thrill of the chase" to hunt down/compare/study which in many cases ends up carrying research-minded people /beyond/ the raw texts themselves. (By analogy, perhaps, just watching travel shows on TV vs. actually visiting a country on bicycle, say. Way too easy to turn couch potato given that choice...). I'm sorry, but watching a travel show in no way decreases my desire to visit said destination. Quite the opposite, actually. The opposite is indeed its intended effect. I feel free pdfs of collectible items to be quite similar. By example, I can, and have, printed out very accurate reproductions of the LBBs from pdfs. The uninformed could easily be fooled as to their authenticity. Nevertheless, they don't replace the real thing. I'm currently in the market for a 5th edition set and am willing to spend hundreds of dollars. If you would have come up to me five years ago and told me that I will one day spend hundreds of dollars for a 1970's era D&D box set, I would have told you that you were crazy. Even in the digital age, there are many who feel there is no substitute for the real thing. I would have to say that collectors fall firmly in this category. |
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on Nov 14, 2010 8:58:27 GMT -6
> Needs of the individual are subjective, but I am talking about the needs of the gaming community I know what you mean (specifically, here) but the gaming community at large doesn't "need" any of that old stuff any more than a WoW player needs to have a woodgrain OD&D box on their bookshelf. Presuming they have a bookshelf. *1/2 jk*> I can see how my statement can be read that way, but I did not say freely. I have no problem paying a decent sum for an item. OTOH, it becomes problematic when you have an academic interest in the contents of a product, but cannot afford it because you have to compete with collectors to get your hands on said item. In which case you just do what I do and remortgage the house. Simple. I've asked before in various ways and contexts but the concept of "people paying a decent sum" still feels very reactive, at best - and grudging/more willing to circumvent even that, in most cases. Compare with, say, a few dozen people proactively putting $100-150 in a pool for a particular purpose - say, to settle any residual (c) claims on the content in those Domesday Books should any of the original contributors or their estates... might not sound like much, but it's (sadly) way more than Jeff Perrin handed over the entire remainder of his rights in Chainmail to WotC for. Admittedly such an approach still doesn't help retrospectively in cases where people do not wish their contributions to be reprinted at all (and there a number of those fanzine-side, I know), but it's better than simply stating "all information should be freeeee" (at someone else's expensive in time and money to obtain and scan the material /and/ pretending there's no such a concept as (c)). > A dilemma worth considering. On the other hand, could it be that the prices for some collectable products are unreasonably high Compared with modern first editions, comic books, those prices are - if anything - unreasonably low given the cultural impact of RPGs. Certainly trivial compared to even mid-range items in the art world. > when part of the market are not interested in the item itself, but simply learning of its contents? Yep; that is true in some cases, I know. For example, the last time I asked the original Greyhawk City mss. hadn't even been read, despite me asking for a time-critical question to be passed along immediately after that auction had completed since the auctioneer deliberately decided (yet again) to hide some key details rather than obtain maximum interest and I'd deduced that hidden content too late. > The dilemma with pdfs is ofcourse file sharing more than them being sold in itself. There are ways around that to a degree, of course. > Interesting perspective. Personally I would think that the more available the sources are, the more people would be encouraged to do research, and would be able to do so. Which is why people are publishing ostensibly "research based" history books based only on the surface information available online without bothering to dig more deeply even /there/? Having more freely available information means that any clueless newbie (and there are plenty of those) can casually come along and randomly pick-and-mix online material without any in-depth understanding whatsoever of the historical context, reliability of sources, etc., which is usually gained through extensive study and familiarity. That's been the lesson SF side as well, fwiw. Hands up if you're going to spend years digging for hidden gems when someone else can turn out the same old stories in a day or two and get a publishing deal. There is no "encouragement" for research either that side or even in an online context. |
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on Nov 14, 2010 9:12:12 GMT -6
> I'm sorry, but watching a travel show in no way decreases my desire to visit said destination. Quite the opposite, actually. On a bicycle? "Visiting" != "experiencing". You're already a minority. And but a tiny minority of that minority will actually bother to research the history, culture, language, etc., far less travel around on foot or bicycle and immerse themselves as best possible within that local context for an extended period. As opposed to getting into a metal cylinder, jumping out, seeing a few (obvious) sights, staying in Western-style hotels, taking a few photos/vids, then jumping back in and flying home. |
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on Nov 14, 2010 9:20:48 GMT -6
The position that archaeologist, historians and social scientists who focus on intellectual and material culture of the past hold regarding collector markets is well established and I won't delve into the arguments or turn this thread into a debate. I mention it only to raise awareness that there are very serious moral issues involved with any collector market, increasing exponentially with the amount of money involved, and the actions of some to tightly restrict/disrupt knowledge/experience over long periods of time solely for the sake of wealth. There's few things that make an archaeologist cringe so much as when someone points at an artifact and asks "How much is it worth?" Sorry, but pulling rank with official or unofficial "archaeologist" titles and their personal views (as if those were coherent across the entire profession) has precisely zero credibility IMHO; not least that the obvious big-name "archaeologist" in the hobby is a lousy researcher, deliberately plays politics with contacts, acts in a cliquish manner, refuses to share information, lies, misleads, cheats, violates (c) at will, etc. I take no "moral lessons" from such individuals far less from any stated-"established views" held by such "professions". |
|
|
|
Post by harami2000 on Nov 14, 2010 9:23:26 GMT -6
> cringe... when someone points at an artifact and asks "How much is it worth?"
(Agreed on that, of course! Way too easy to blame the Antiques Roadshow & international equivalents thereof for that reductionist "item = money" equation)
|
|
