Was AD&D Gygax's definitive take on fantasy RPGing

[pessimisthalfling]

Was the first edition of the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons game Gygax's definitive take on fantasy roleplaying?
Did he continue to expand many of its ideas after he parted ways with TSR. Or was AD&D a product of its time or whatever design restrictions he placed on himself when he wrote it?

[monk]

Well, he did make Dangerous Journeys and Lejendary Adventure later on, so he eventually had some other ideas he wanted to try out.

[Deleted]

Gary produced several games after leaving TSR, ending up with a set of rules-light skill-bundled rules for playing FRPGs, Lejendary Adventure (LA).

LA is a nice rules set, very simple and yet allowing the recreation of characters from favorite novels and such. You want a spell-casting thief? No problem. A wizard with a sword, chainmail, and genuine attitude? No problem.

Of course, just as there are limitations to class-based character generation (D&D)? There are also limitations to skill-based char-gen such as LA's. Overall, however, I like the approach Gygax took (though I still prefer OD&D).

To sum up: Gygax professed to be an advocate in his latter years of rule-light game systems and oft-stated online (ENWorld and DragonsFoot) that Lejendary Adventures was his definitive work. It is my personal opinion that, if pressed hard on the point in a non-public forum, he would have admitted that his D&D game would probably be his magnum opus, but that is pure supposition on my part and not based upon any direct or indirect statement by the Grand Master of Dragons himself.

[pessimisthalfling]

This maybe a really difficult question to answer: Do you think AD&D would have logically evolved into Lejendary Adventure? Or was Gygax forced to switch gears after leaving TSR?

From what little I've gathered (without reading any LA book) it seems like Gygax favored abstract simplicity over comprehensive reality-simulation. I maybe wrong because I've read very little Gygax. This is just the impression I get from the AD&D PH and the descriptions of LA I've read on the interwebs.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[Deleted]

Unlikely, though I feel that he would made the same progression as his game publishing history: increasing complexity followed by a big drop to a simpler rules system.

I think the gear switching had a lot to do with TSR (et al.) and the scrutiny his work fell under as a result of his departure. Any class-based FRPG would have probably gotten him sued back into the the Stone Age.

He is also on record as stating the skill-based approach is due, in part at least, to his work on a computer FRPG that never saw the light of day. But the skills approach definitely set this work apart from his body of work at TSR, even to the rather unwieldy (at times) terminology in LA to avoid using D&D jargon.

[Finarvyn]

My understanding is that Gary was well into his own version of 2E when he lost control of the company, so he had planned for AD&D to evolve at least some from what had already been published. TSR took his notes and made their own version.

Gary's other post-TSR RPG publications were hobbled somewhat by the fact that he wasn't allowed to make anything too close to what had been done already, so it's hard to say if his later games really reflected his long-term Master Plan^TM. I do know that he was pretty enthusiastic about Castles & Crusades, which is kind of AD&D evolved, so maybe his 2E might have turned out that way.

(There are some threads on DF about this and he wrote a "Sorcerer's Scroll" editorial in Dragon that detailed his overall thoughts on a revised edition. I don't recall all of the specifics offhand.)

[Deleted]

That is my understanding as well. The Gygax 2nd Edition would have consolidated all the material from UA into the core rules, and some additional sub-classes would be included (such as mountebank and jester).

I often wonder what that edition of the game would have been like. No matter earnestly he was questioned about it, however, I never saw Gary reply (online) with any answer other than (paraphrased) "that material is now the IP of a different company, I've got my own material I think is pretty swell!".

[cooper]

Ad&d was a cobbling together of the optional rules from all the suppliments to date that Gary liked including rules from Chainmail; then tweaked as he saw fit. Surrounding all these was chapters and chapters of garys own philosophy on gaming and world building, combined with a "simulacrum" like rewriting of arneson's contribution to the game in garys own words in order to take dave's name off the cover.

It was mostly about creating an "official" d&d that could be used at tournaments so one person wouldn't show up running combat with the fantasy combat table and another with thac0 or one guy using eldritch wizardry initiative and another using chainmails mass combat etc...

[achijusan]

well; its possible that "Gary's 2nd edition" might have turned out something like this:

adventuresdarkanddeep.com/

[thegreyelf]

Apr 6, 2011 12:01:03 GMT -6 cooper said:

It was mostly about creating an "official" d&d that could be used at tournaments so one person wouldn't show up running combat with the fantasy combat table and another with thac0 or one guy using eldritch wizardry initiative and another using chainmails mass combat etc...

This. And it's one of the most out-of-context bits of information so often abused by haters of old-school gaming, such as those who love to cite the Dragon editorial where Gygax says if you're not playing by the book, you're not playing AD&D. Taken in context he's addressing convention- and organized-style play, not home games. Taken out of context, Gygax becomes a tyrannical "my way or the highway" villain.

[Deleted]

Apr 6, 2011 12:01:36 GMT -6 achijusan said:

well; its possible that "Gary's 2nd edition" might have turned out something like this:

adventuresdarkanddeep.com/

I've been watching that project with some degree of interest. My game of choice is OD&D, I started playing it a year after it was released, but the editor of that rules set has a degree of enthusiasm for the project that I find quite refreshing.

[pessimisthalfling]

This thread has changed the way I look at AD&D; especially in relation with oD&D. I always thought that Gygax felt that oD&D was faulty because of it's vagueness, mostly because of my misreading of the "playing by the book" quote.
From the looks of it, it seems like I was mistaken and I'm quite glad of it.
It is awesome to read that he didn't see 1E as a fix for a broken game, but as an attempt to bring some cohesion to a great set of rules that was released in separate supplements.

[foxroe]

FWIW (and from what I understand from second hand information -- and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong), Gary never stopped playing OD&D, regardless of his other projects or what happened to him professionally.

[Mr. Darke]

From what I know Gary did keep playing OD&D. However, He did also try to get people into LA. However the mixed response to LA and it's difficulties with publishing kept several people away from the game. I tend to think that, in His later years, Gary would have preferred to be more associated with LA rather than with D&D.

[geoffrey]

Apr 9, 2011 13:07:51 GMT -6 Mr. Darke said:

I tend to think that, in His later years, Gary would have preferred to be more associated with LA rather than with D&D.

I long felt sorry for Gary on that score. Imagine being a game designer, and most of your fans pay scant notice to your current projects but prefer stuff you did decades ago. I imagine it like this:

FAN: "Geoffrey, give us a detailed account of your thoughts and design rationales when you designed room #27 in level #4 of the dungeon you published in 1982. Should the trolls get a +1 or a +2 on their attacks vs. PCs wearing red?"

ME: "Um... That was decades ago. I don't remember any of that. Just have fun with it. Besides, aren't you interested in my new Isle of the Unknown? It is a huge improvement in every way over my decades-old dungeons."

FAN: "No, I'm more interested in those trolls in room #27."

ME:

[pessimisthalfling]

I can see where it will be a constant source of frustration for Gygax to have to answer questions about a game that he's no longer attached to. I'd imagine it is similar to that weird limbo every Star Trek alumni has fallen into.

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2011 9:52:06 GMT -6 pessimisthalfling said:

I can see where it will be a constant source of frustration

He did have a lot of pride in his co-creation but some bitterness toward some of the business persons with whom he had dealings subsequent to leaving TSR. His frustration with questions about that drama became evident fairly quickly.

His frustration with D&D versus LA was more along the lines of a parent with two exceptional children, the younger of which is always being overlooked in favor of the older. Naturally, they are proud of the older child (or game in this case) but feel a bit frustrated that few see the qualities of the younger.

The proposed LA rewrite might have helped quite a bit in this regard. Unfortunately, the project got the axe when Gary passed on and no reliable or official news has been forthcoming as to the fate of the game.

[Mr. Darke]

I would like to see LA brought back. I had Essentials but, I don't think it did the game justice. Finding hard copies of the full game has not been easy and out of my price range.

Everyone I have talked to about it have really liked it and I am willing to give it a second chance.

[Deleted]

Apr 12, 2011 13:53:09 GMT -6 Mr. Darke said:

Finding hard copies of the full game has not been easy and out of my price range.

Check out the LA clone "Perilous Journeys".

[jrt]

Gary's feelings towards D&D are really complex.

He played OD&D but only occasionally. His regular campaigns were the games he was developing--mostly DJ, a rules system that will never be published for the aborted Cyberdreams game system--and then LA. He never really restored his Greyhawk campaign, some one shorts, and it was mostly about delving into his Castle than anything else.

I do agree that Bloch's delving into DJ's concepts would probably be a lot like what AD&D 2.0 would have been under Gygax, although a lot of those concepted ended up much different under Mythus. Once he had to give up DJ he had to reinvent his gaming ideas again and there's probably little you'd see in that game that is similar to what he planned for AD&D, as he embraced new ideas and didn't want to repeat himself.

Gary used to be a lot more prickly about D&D and for a long time he didn't even want to answer questions about it, but over the years he mellowed in that regard. I think the exposure to the Internet and places like Dragonsfoot and ENWorld gave him some renewed interest. In his waning years he enjoyed answering questions more and more, although it cut down on his productivity.

To be honest, LA was his true love. He really wished more people would play it, and was disappointed about that. I felt he got boxed into his older settings and rules, and I think most of his fans wanted him to do more D&D work.

The whole C&C thing is more complex. Gary really hated all the 3e-isms in C&C. I remember when the thing was still in beta after I wrote up a few things for Yggsburg he threatened to leave the project. In truth, the support for C&C was more or less his support for TLG, rather than a personal preference. He would have prefered an OSRIC type game, but felt the potential legal risk wasn't worth it, especially since the DJ fiasco, he never wanted his work to be a target again.

As far as getting copies of LA, there are still many out there in used bookstores, no need for a "clone". For those regretting not getting it--the books were available for over 10 years, so there was plenty of opportunity to get them. Sadly, I guess it didn't have that much of a following.

As far as other projects go, Gail is pretty much taking it slow--projects are going to be developed for the computer first, if at all. At one time she was considering print publishing but between the economic forecasts, the dismal state of Tabletop gaming (including troubling trends like retro-cloning and gratis publication), and other priorities (such as working on the memorial project and some other efforts), I doubt you'll see any Tabletop projects anytime soon.

[Mr. Darke]

LA may have been in print for 10 years but, it was out of print by the time I learned of it.

[Mr. Darke]

Apr 12, 2011 13:59:43 GMT -6 @dubeers said:

Apr 12, 2011 13:53:09 GMT -6 Mr. Darke said:

Finding hard copies of the full game has not been easy and out of my price range.

Check out the LA clone "Perilous Journeys".

I've downloaded it and have made a few test characters. I like how it works and will hopefully, get an adventure up soon. Thanks for pointing this out!

[Deleted]

Happy to help!

I'm glad you liked it, the game system has some definite strong points.

[Mr. Darke]

The only thing I have had any issue with were the spell lists. I did find a way I liked as I found the game is compatible (With a little filing) to both (A)D&D and Dangerous Journeys. So, I padded up the spells a bit with material from both sources. Darius really did his homework on this!

[calithena]

IIRC Frank Mentzer has opined that AD&D 1e was influenced in many ways by Lawrence Schick. Frank had some reasons to think this too. Not that it's not Gary's game of course, but I thought it was worth throwing that into this discussion.

[geoffrey]

Apr 29, 2011 18:49:16 GMT -6 calithena said:

IIRC Frank Mentzer has opined that AD&D 1e was influenced in many ways by Lawrence Schick. Frank had some reasons to think this too. Not that it's not Gary's game of course, but I thought it was worth throwing that into this discussion.

Hey, Calithena. I remember reading that years ago and being blown-away by it, so I asked Frank Mentzer: "Frank, on another message board a poster mentioned that you think of AD&D as Lawrence Schick's D&D. Is that indeed the case?"

Frank answered: "I believe that poster is incorrect. If I did type such a bizarre comment I'm sure I was drunk."

Timothy Kask also commented: 'Basic and Advanced were outlined and delineated well before "Larry" (I hope he's reading this; it will irk him to use that diminuitive) ever came aboard. How do I know this? Because Gary and I spent the better part of two weeks sequestered in his office cutting up old booklets and covering the walls of his office with notes and pages as we thrashed out the initial concept. Now how much he f-ed it up later I can't say. But it certainly was not his idea nor was it his concept.'



Link: www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10717&p=544165&hilit=schick#p544165

[kesher]

It just gets weirder as all this history unfolds...

[calithena]

Steve Marsh tells a different story:

www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10718&start=255

Tim acknowledges in this thread that Lawrence Schick played a major role in the later stages of editing AD&D. Now, how much influence he had over the rules as published is a more problematic question, as the exchanges here indicate, even assuming that everyone's memory is right. Kellri has said that he thinks LS had a substantial influence on AD&D - maybe just the DMG? - and he's extremely shrewd, so if you can get him to elaborate that might lead to some useful information.

[calithena]

But for the record, the post I thought I was remembering from Frank or whoever - one of the old guys - in no way attributed the ultimate source of any of the versions to anyone but EGG and DA. It was more like - Holmes was Holmes' take on D&D, Moldvay was Moldvay's, Mentzer was Mentzer's, AD&D 1 was Schick's, AD&D 2 was Cook's, or something like that.

On the other hand Kask also says that he and Mike Carr were Gary's sounding boards for the earlier development of AD&D and that Schick only came in as editor later, so it's probable that even if there is some truth in the idea that he influenced the final form of the rules it's less than in these other cases.

[aldarron]

May 10, 2011 12:46:09 GMT -6 calithena said:

But for the record, the post I thought I was remembering from Frank or whoever - one of the old guys - in no way attributed the ultimate source of any of the versions to anyone but EGG and DA. It was more like - Holmes was Holmes' take on D&D, Moldvay was Moldvay's, Mentzer was Mentzer's, AD&D 1 was Schick's, AD&D 2 was Cook's, or something like that.

On the other hand Kask also says that he and Mike Carr were Gary's sounding boards for the earlier development of AD&D and that Schick only came in as editor later, so it's probable that even if there is some truth in the idea that he influenced the final form of the rules it's less than in these other cases.

Yeah, think you're remembering a Q and A from Marsh onf DF. Havard posted a bunch of Marsh's quotes and he did say "AD&D is the Law Schick supplement."
blackmoor.mystara.us/forums/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=886&p=9659#p9659

But I think is prolly a stronger sounding statement than he intended. In any case, I don't think there is much doubt about the input and authority of Gygax in AD&D.