|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 23, 2014 19:17:19 GMT -6
We know that Blackmoor, Greyhawk, and Tekumel are the most famous of the original D&D worlds. I don't want to start a flame war, but I was hoping that Michael could compare and contrast the "big three" game masters (Arneson, Gygax, and Barker) from those campaigns, since he played in all three.
What kind of style did each GM have? What made each GM different from the rest? What made each campaign feel different from the rest?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2014 21:09:32 GMT -6
Buy my book, coming soon to a Kickstarter near you, to be announced in this site and any other I can.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 23, 2014 22:29:41 GMT -6
Of course I'll buy your book. I was just hoping for a preview.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2014 18:59:04 GMT -6
What color were the Professor's T-shirts? I saw a picture of him at Gen Con in 1974 where he was wearing a red one, and I'm really confused - I thought he usually wore white ones at his game table. Can you address this? And can you tell us what your reaction was when he set his chest hair on fire with his cigar ashes?  You tease, you!!! yours, chirine |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2014 15:26:30 GMT -6
* snerk *
Don't worry, Chirine, I'm only devoting a single chapter to the ol' coot! There'll be PLENTY of room for other tales.
I will say that in a way, Phil was a victim of his own popularity. I normally suggest everyone in a single gaming session have the same taste; Phil had so many players who wanted to play, and so little time, he had to mix people in a single evening who wanted very different things from gaming.
Unlike Dave and Gary, for whom gaming was both a hobby *AND* a major part of their career aspirations, Phil was also the chair of a university department and had a lot of other time commitments. For Dave and Gary, scheduling another game session was part of their livelihood. Not so with Phil, so he had to be more sparing with his time and pack his gaming sessions more full.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2014 8:44:47 GMT -6
* snerk * Don't worry, Chirine, I'm only devoting a single chapter to the ol' coot! There'll be PLENTY of room for other tales. I will say that in a way, Phil was a victim of his own popularity. I normally suggest everyone in a single gaming session have the same taste; Phil had so many players who wanted to play, and so little time, he had to mix people in a single evening who wanted very different things from gaming. Unlike Dave and Gary, for whom gaming was both a hobby *AND* a major part of their career aspirations, Phil was also the chair of a university department and had a lot of other time commitments. For Dave and Gary, scheduling another game session was part of their livelihood. Not so with Phil, so he had to be more sparing with his time and pack his gaming sessions more full. I think you've got a very good comparison, here, especially with the diversity in the players out at Phil's. My impression with Dave (and with gary, the few times I got to play with him in the chair) was that 'the party' was pretty unified and had pretty much the same goals. With Phil, I had the impression in the original group that there were a lot more diverse interests in play; not so much in the original Thursday Night Group, after we split off, as I think we all just wanted to explore the place. And I'd agree about Phil being the victim of his own popularity, too. I wound up having to do two groups of my own to keep up with demand, and they wound up being the 'waiting rooms' for Phil's games. yours, chirine |
|
