history lesson -- Gygax and TSR?
May T. Young
S. Keith Graham <vap...@cad.gatech.edu> wrote:
> In article <3bqqns$s...@bigfoot.wustl.edu>,
> qa...@bohemia.wustl.edu (Karl Stiefvater) writes:
>
>>I despise TSR.
>
>At least we agree there. :-)
It has been several years since I've been into the RPG scene,
but now I've started to read the newsgroups and find that TSR
has become a name to inspire open loathing and (closely
related?) that Gary Gygax no longer heads the company. The
Rec.games.frp FAQ doesn't have very much to say about all
this. Could someone tell me what happened to Gygax and TSR?
aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
I do believe that his wife got it when they got a divorce and TSR has tried
hard to remove his name from as much as possible since.
The Darksphere Master
The computer is your friend. Trust the computer.
Slacker 01
aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu writes:
>>Could someone tell me what happened to Gygax and TSR?
>I do believe that his wife got it when they got a divorce and TSR has
tried
>hard to remove his name from as much as possible since.
Wow, is that about as wrong as could possibly be believed.
Gygax lost his control of TSR because he was a bad businessman, and failed
to maintain a majority share of stock in his company. When Lorraine Dille,
of the Buck Rogers Dille family fortune, bought up some extra stock from
Gary's son Luke (I think), she became the majority shareholder, walked
into TSR the next day and fired Gary.
Which was not the worst thing to happen to TSR; Gary was a gamer, not a
businessman (obviously), and many people at TSR feel Gary would have
eventually run the company into the ground.
Which is also not to say that Gary has been treated fairly since he left,
either.
---Slacker01/AOL
Matt Hurd
Slacker 01 <slac...@aol.com> wrote:
>....stuff about TSR ousting gary deleted...
>Which was not the worst thing to happen to TSR;
i disagree immensely on this. if you take away the creative head then all you
can do is stagnate if a new head is not found - TSR has lost it's head and is
now wandering around aimlessly...
if that's not the worst then pray tell what is?
>Gary was a gamer, not a businessman (obviously), and many people at TSR feel
>Gary would have eventually run the company into the ground.
are these the same people that are now running TSR into the ground?
it seems to me (like with any product) the owner should also be a user (ala
the hair club for men slogan...) that way the owner knows what kind of stuff
his company is producing. all of these "business men" boneheads have no clue
what their "products" are doing to the industry and the game.
atleast when gary was involved he could see the direct impact any product
would have on the game. in fact the earlier adventure modules were thuroughly
playtested before marketed, most of which were written by gary and his players.
now-a-days, the only mention of play-testing is in the Dungeon (tm) magazine
and that is only of late... i guess actually spending time to see if a product
is playable will weed out all of the stuff TSR plans to put on the market and
then they'd actually have to re-do something to make it work - yikes! that's
extra work. and besides even if they did play-test it, they'd probably use
some of their munchkin staff and get a favorable answer anyway so they wouldn't
have to re-do it...
it was a sad day when they ousted gary...
have fun,
matt h.
--
matt hurd m...@wlv.iipo.gtegsc.com /\ WARNING
these thoughts and opinions were brought to \/ DO NOT REMOVE THIS PARTICLE
you by the letters ipx and the number 2 /\ |
- no one else was involved - especially me... \/ V
Beamish Boy
I heard that he died and left TSR to his cats, but that an evil lawyer
conspired to make it look like he hadn't actually died, founding such
dummy corporations as New Infinity Games and inventing dummy games
like Dangerous Journeys.
But I was just as wrong as you are.
Gygax sold all of his licenses to TSR during the 80's, and left.
The circumstances of that exit are the subject of various rumors,
and I don't think I know the truth (the rumor I heard was that
TSR was bought out by a larger company, who then wanted to reduce
Gygax's control, but Gygax was unwilling to give up his control.
So the larger company took actions within the company that drove
Gygax to sell out and leave - said actions included publishing
soap opera games and such. Subsequent to Gygax leaving, TSR went
wild on new materials for AD&D, including 2nd edition and new settings.)
Why do people dislike Gygax? He comes across as a pompous, self-
absorbed windbag in the things he's written during the last 10 years.
Why do people dislike TSR? They're enormous, they pursue their trade-
marks with an occasionally distasteful fervor, and they have recently
declared that all fan-developed materials for their games are illegal
uses of their copyrights, subject to suit if said materials are
distributed outside of a single gaming group.
--
Robbie Westmoreland, Dilettante | star-bellied geek | rob...@inviso.com
I'm apathetic and I think about voting!
Why yes, I speak for the entire U.S. government. Why do you ask?
Jeff Kesselman
>aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu writes:
>
>>>Could someone tell me what happened to Gygax and TSR?
>
>>I do believe that his wife got it when they got a divorce and TSR has
>tried
>>hard to remove his name from as much as possible since.
>
>Wow, is that about as wrong as could possibly be believed.
>
Aren't legends wonderful? Everywhere you look you'll find someone else
who knows 'the right one'. :)
>Gygax lost his control of TSR because he was a bad businessman, and failed
>to maintain a majority share of stock in his company. When Lorraine Dille,
>of the Buck Rogers Dille family fortune, bought up some extra stock from
>Gary's son Luke (I think), she became the majority shareholder, walked
>into TSR the next day and fired Gary.
>
Now, the STORY I heard was a combinatio nof both of these. Gygax's wife
got a significant share in the divorce. Lorraine Dille bought HER shares,
and then managed to scrounge enough somewhere else (I forget where) to
get a majority control.
A very compelte history of this was put together awhiel back in .misc but
I don't remember it all of the top off my head. TSr has ben fraught with
in-fighting though sicne the very beggining and gygax wasn't the only
original authoer who was pushed out by internal politics and power plays
(Anyone remember Dave Arneson??)
>Which was not the worst thing to happen to TSR; Gary was a gamer, not a
>businessman (obviously), and many people at TSR feel Gary would have
>eventually run the company into the ground.
>
Not that TSR isn't tryign to do that ANYWAY with being over
"business-like". Theres a deicate balance you have to maintain in a
hobby industry. TSR is NOT IBM c.1960 selling mainframes to corporate
america, whatever they'ld like to believe.
Jeff kesselman
Scuminus Dregg
one of the creatures in the Planes of Chaos boxed set: the Glaristroi, an
*obscenely powerful* demon type (20 HD, does I think 4d6 damage per
attack, what more need I say?).
As to whether or not TSR is better off without him, well, I'm of two
minds (which is one less than usual, heh.):
He's written some pompous stuff in his day--though I've heard tales of
more of it than I've actually seen--and he wasn't all that great at
characterization. His _Guide to Roleplaying Mastery_ is an unintentional
riot.
On the other hand, he was certainly creative. Not to accuse anyone of
anything, but much of his early work leaves me with the strong impression
that extensive use of recreational pharmaceuticals was involved. All in
all, he was a great factor for Chaos within TSR: now, the balance has
shifted too far in the direction of Law, and stagnated.
(So what we really need, IMO, is a druid with an AK-47 and some
plastique...)
- Scuminus Dregg
--
--
"Don't answer the riddle; kill the sphinx."
"That which does not kill me had better be able to run away damn fast."
Goth
>Actually, Gygax apparently still has some connection to TSR: he designed
>one of the creatures in the Planes of Chaos boxed set: the Glaristroi, an
>*obscenely powerful* demon type (20 HD, does I think 4d6 damage per
>attack, what more need I say?).
Yeah, I noticed that too. But I'm not sure if Gary developed the Glaristroi
specifically for the Planes of Chaos boxed set, or if TSR just pulled it
from and older source (maybe an old Dragon mag) that I haven't seen.
>On the other hand, he was certainly creative. Not to accuse anyone of
>anything, but much of his early work leaves me with the strong impression
>that extensive use of recreational pharmaceuticals was involved. All in
>all, he was a great factor for Chaos within TSR: now, the balance has
>shifted too far in the direction of Law, and stagnated.
Oh good. I'm soooo glad I'm not the only one who suspects this. Anyone who
can develop that many demons^H^H^H^H^H^Htanar'ri and devils^H^H^H^H^H^H
baatezu, well... Besides we all know Gary was quite clued up on herbs,
from that neat table at the back of the 1st Ed DMG. I wonder if the table
got playtested? :-)
Goth.
Jeff Kesselman
>aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu dicit:
>
>Why do people dislike Gygax? He comes across as a pompous, self-
>absorbed windbag in the things he's written during the last 10 years.
>Why do people dislike TSR? They're enormous, they pursue their trade-
>marks with an occasionally distasteful fervor, and they have recently
>declared that all fan-developed materials for their games are illegal
>uses of their copyrights, subject to suit if said materials are
>distributed outside of a single gaming group.
>--
Great summation, robbie! (Yes, this IS me and NOT my evil-twin).
The only thing I can add is that they also have tried to claim TM on some
silly and obviously non-tm things...
Jeff kesselman
Robert Johnson
: Act5ually, Gygax apparently still has some connection to TSR: he designed
: *obscenely powerful* demon type (20 HD, does I think 4d6 damage per
: attack, what more need I say?).
Hmmm, it seems that T$R has pulled another old monster out of the
files of Dragon and released it with their current crap. The
Goristroi (as it was originally called) was published somewhere
in the 80's issues of Dragon as an addendum to Monster Manual II
(i.e. something Gygax forgot to put in). Hope that clears up
some of the mystery.
Robert
Slacker 01
(Matt Hurd) writes:
>i disagree immensely on this. if you take away the creative head then
>all you can do is stagnate if a new head is not found - TSR has lost it's
>head and is now wandering around aimlessly...
What makes you think that Gary Gygax was TSR's "creative head"? The fact
is, TSR succeeded not because of a cult of personality around Gary's work
(if so, then New Infinities would have succeeded), but through the
combined efforts of a number of very talented people. Sure, Gary was the
figurehead; but by that very definition he was not the substantive
"creative head."
Gary's creative range was essentially printing modules that he had written
up for his Greyhawk campaign; which is hardly sufficient to qualify as the
"creative head" for an entire gaming company.
>>Gary was a gamer, not a businessman (obviously), and many people at TSR
feel
>>Gary would have eventually run the company into the ground.
>are these the same people that are now running TSR into the ground?
Well, I definitely don't dispute that TSR's in some serious creative
trouble right now; I think it's made enormous strides with products like
Mystara, Planescape, Red Steel and Council of Wyrms, but the fact is that
it's hit the same type of creative stagnancy that TSR had shortly before
Gygax left, and it might take another important personnel change to
revitalize itself. There's some shifting already going on -- Skip and Jean
moved from RPGA to design, Zeb cook left for VR -- but there's probably
more necessary.
None of which really changes the fact that Gary was a shitty businessman,
and might have run the company into the ground long before TSR was able to
stagnate at the end of 1994. All accounts of New Infinities, for example,
even from Gary's own friends list is as an unqualified business disaster.
It's no surprise that he took Dangerous Journeys to GDW rather than try to
start his own business again.
>atleast when gary was involved he could see the direct impact any product
>would have on the game. in fact the earlier adventure modules were
>thuroughly playtested before marketed, most of which were written by gary
>and his players.
I'm not so sure why you think the early Gygax modules were so heavily
play-tested; I loved them too, but the fact is that they're full of plot
holes -- some of them without any plot at all -- and the playtesting
usually amount to running it at a convention after giving it a
Greyhawk-campaign dry-run.
Pick up D1-2 one day and take a look; you'll see what I mean.
>now-a-days, the only mention of play-testing is in the Dungeon (tm)
>magazine and that is only of late... i guess actually spending time to
see if >a product is playable will weed out all of the stuff TSR plans to
put on the >market andthen they'd actually have to re-do something to make
it work - >yikes! that's extra work. and besides even if they did
play-test it, they'd >probably use some of their munchkin staff and get a
favorable answer >anyway so they wouldn't have to re-do it...
Actually, I think you're speaking way beyond the scope of your knowledge
here, since not only do you have no idea what goes into playtesting TSR
products; but it sounds like you're not even familiar with the basic TSR
editorial setup, which would be a prerequisite to making comments like
yours. TSR's certainly earned its share of criticism lately; but insulting
comments like yours aren't really part of it.
Best,
---Slacker01/AOL
James W Walden
Gygax.. by Scuminus Dr...@panix.com
> one of the creatures in the Planes of Chaos boxed set: the Glaristroi, an
> *obscenely powerful* demon type (20 HD, does I think 4d6 damage per
> attack, what more need I say?).
That sounds very much like a demon that got left out of the Monster Manual II
and was subsequently printed in an article by Gygax in Dragon magazine. I'd
be quite surprised if Gygax was doing something new for TSR.
James
"Truth decays into beauty, while beauty soon becomes merely charm. Charm
ends up as strangeness, and even that doesn't last, but up and down are
forever." - The Laws of Physics
Paul Culotta
>
all you
> can do is stagnate if a new head is not found - TSR has lost it's head
and is
> now wandering around aimlessly...
>
>
TSR feel
> >Gary would have eventually run the company into the ground.
>
> are these the same people that are now running TSR into the ground?
>
(ala
> the hair club for men slogan...) that way the owner knows what kind of
stuff
> his company is producing. all of these "business men" boneheads have
no clue
> what their "products" are doing to the industry and the game.
>
product
> would have on the game. in fact the earlier adventure modules were
thuroughly
> playtested before marketed, most of which were written by gary and his
players.
>
magazine
> and that is only of late... i guess actually spending time to see if
a product
> is playable will weed out all of the stuff TSR plans to put on the
market and
> then they'd actually have to re-do something to make it work - yikes!
that's
> extra work. and besides even if they did play-test it, they'd
probably use
> some of their munchkin staff and get a favorable answer anyway so they
wouldn't
> have to re-do it...
>
>
> have fun,
>
> matt h.
>
>
> --
> matt hurd m...@wlv.iipo.gtegsc.com /\ WARNING
> these thoughts and opinions were brought to \/ DO NOT REMOVE THIS
PARTICLE
> you by the letters ipx and the number 2 /\ |
> - no one else was involved - especially me... \/ V
by TSR stafrf. They are playtested by outside players, some of whom at
times are contributing writers, but not employees. And the playtesters,
at least in my group, are hardly munchkins (Munchkins who appear at my
table undergo a transformation to a non-Munchkin character or suffer a
horrible fate). Playtest comments are frank and have resulted in
significant changes i n the manuscript on several occasions.
Just so the record is straight,
Paul F. Culotta
Bryan J. Maloney
>Oh good. I'm soooo glad I'm not the only one who suspects this. Anyone who
>can develop that many demons^H^H^H^H^H^Htanar'ri and devils^H^H^H^H^H^H
>baatezu, well... Besides we all know Gary was quite clued up on herbs,
The demons and devils (called poofies and slurpies or something equally as
stupid in the new edition) were NOT made up, by and large. I can assure you
from my reading that nearly every one of them has appeared in some form or
another in fiction and occult literature well before Gygax began gaming.
aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
> In article <D0Esy...@inviso.com>, Beamish Boy <rob...@inviso.com> wrote:
>>aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu dicit:
>>
>>Why do people dislike Gygax? He comes across as a pompous, self-
>>absorbed windbag in the things he's written during the last 10 years.
I can understand people disliking TSR for what they've done on the net and
such? Did he not design this game you all love so much <AD&D>? He seems to
have had put a lot of working into it, and don't see how the courts could have
a given creative copyright over to his wife.
The Darksphere Master
In darkness, there is light.
Aaron Brezenski
<aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> wrote:
>I can understand people disliking TSR for what they've done on the net and
>such? Did he not design this game you all love so much <AD&D>? He seems to
>have had put a lot of working into it, and don't see how the courts could have
>a given creative copyright over to his wife.
From what I understand, the creative copyright was assigned (in earlier days)
to TSR. When he lost half his stock in the divorce (Wisconsin law mandates
50-50 splits, or did at the time), he no longer held a majority. Ex-bride
gave/sold/proxied her shares to Lorraine Williams, driving her over the 50%
mark, and giving her control.
Aaron Brezenski
"Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean there's not someone out to get me."
Card-Carrying Member of the Illuminati
"If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science. It is opinion."
"... what are the facts, and to how many decimal places?"
Matt Hurd
Slacker 01 <slac...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>What makes you think that Gary Gygax was TSR's "creative head"? The fact
>is, TSR succeeded not because of a cult of personality around Gary's work
>(if so, then New Infinities would have succeeded),
new infinities had a bad chance of success compared to d&d because it had to
try and steal people away from other game systems. when d&d came out there
was no other game system to compete with and therefore filled the hole that
people had open inside them (a game inwhich they could fulfill their
fantasies!).
>but through the combined efforts of a number of very talented people. Sure,
>Gary was the figurehead; but by that very definition he was not the
>substantive "creative head."
by creative head i specifically meant that it was his and dave arneson's idea
to create d&d in the first place and it was their brainstorming that kept it
alive for a good number of years before they even reached a sizable staff
level. to me that's creative.
>
>Gary's creative range was essentially printing modules that he had written
>up for his Greyhawk campaign; which is hardly sufficient to qualify as the
>"creative head" for an entire gaming company.
ah, but at the time Greyhawk was all there was. and all of his adventures
could easily be fitted into personal campaigns created by any DM.
>
>Well, I definitely don't dispute that TSR's in some serious creative
>trouble right now; I think it's made enormous strides with products like
>Mystara, Planescape, Red Steel and Council of Wyrms,
i don't. i think they could have spent there resources developing more for
what they already have (ie. it would be easy for them to produce generic
adventures to fit into a broad spectrum of their worlds rather than develop
more worlds.)
>but the fact is that
>it's hit the same type of creative stagnancy that TSR had shortly before
>Gygax left, and it might take another important personnel change to
>revitalize itself. There's some shifting already going on -- Skip and Jean
>moved from RPGA to design, Zeb cook left for VR -- but there's probably
>more necessary.
maybe TSR was reaching a creative stagnation shortly before gary left because
no ones mind was on developing - rather their minds were on getting gary out
of the business. and then once he was out they found no one had any idea on
where to pick up and go...
i'm not positive on why Zeb left (he was one of the old-timers and it was a
sad day when he did leave) but i have a feeling that he was feeling constricted
by the "business side" of TSR and decided to go somewhere where his creative
abilities can be more usefull. as to moving Skip into a design position, i am
glad they did that, but i'm afraid it's useless if they don't change their idea
of what they want to design. what they need to focus on is more adventure
suplements and not more worlds or rules!
>
>None of which really changes the fact that Gary was a shitty businessman,
>and might have run the company into the ground long before TSR was able to
>stagnate at the end of 1994.
IMO, TSR stagnated well before 1994, more like 1990. just after they made the
sales pitch that with 2nd edition all you would need was three books to play!
to play what? from there on all they did was make new worlds, destroyed worlds
already in existance, and made tons of silly new optional rules! where was
the generic adventures that old-time DMs could put into their personally
developed worlds? there are none!!
>All accounts of New Infinities, for example,
>even from Gary's own friends list is as an unqualified business disaster.
and TSR is doing good?
>
>I'm not so sure why you think the early Gygax modules were so heavily
>play-tested; I loved them too, but the fact is that they're full of plot
>holes -- some of them without any plot at all --
having no plot is better than a plot that will change the whole world!
>and the playtesting
>usually amount to running it at a convention after giving it a
>Greyhawk-campaign dry-run.
>Pick up D1-2 one day and take a look; you'll see what I mean.
correct. some of the modules were printed forms of tournament adventures.
but atleast they were played before they went to the press and that means that
they were more likely corrected on major and minor errors.
>
>Actually, I think you're speaking way beyond the scope of your knowledge
>here, since not only do you have no idea what goes into playtesting TSR
>products; but it sounds like you're not even familiar with the basic TSR
>editorial setup, which would be a prerequisite to making comments like
>yours.
and you do?
as to playtesting, i specifically refer to new "optional" rules. there is no
way that any self-respecting non-munchkin can agree that having a first level
fighter with specialization in longsword and specialization in two weapon
fighting style fighting with two longswords can have 5/2 att/rnd can be
anything but worthy of a 12th level fighter of 1st edition w/o unearthed
arcana. and the rules have not changed the monsters! that same 1st level
fighter would outclass any monster that would be expected to be a challenge
for him. all they were trying to do was make powerful PCs and they succeeded!
i don't know about your "basic TSR editorial setup", but any setup governed by
munchkins can only produce munchkin class stuff. any material that is not
munchkinized will not be produced.
>TSR's certainly earned its share of criticism lately; but insulting
>comments like yours aren't really part of it.
ah, but what you classify as insulting i classify as fact!
if TSR would again proceed with the real gamer in mind and not just quick
market any idea they can come up with just to make money, they can still become
a well liked noun in many-a-gamers gaming circles... and i think their first
step towards doing this is to direct their talents towards developing generic
adventures to be used in any game world and stop fussing with new worlds and
rules.
also, they should not be catering to the beginning gamer who's age they believe
must be 6 years old. after all, most of us gamers here started AD&D with the
hard cover 1st edition PHB and DMG in the late 70's and early 80's (usually
after playing and enormous amount of D&D with the softcover books and even
before that with only the pamphlets.) and we're doing fine aren't we?
Christopher Wooff
(somewhere in the issue 70-85 time span). It is not a new beast.
Pete Hardie
>Why do people dislike Gygax? He comes across as a pompous, self-
>absorbed windbag in the things he's written during the last 10 years.
He comes across that way in person, too.
--
Pete Hardie email: ...!emory!slammer!nyet!pete
"Well, Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable,
And Lightness has a call that's hard to hear" -- Indigo Girls
[ use of this address for commercial purposes w/o permission is forbidden ]
Huw Leonard
>> this. Could someone tell me what happened to Gygax and TSR?
>
>I do believe that his wife got it when they got a divorce and TSR has tried
>hard to remove his name from as much as possible since.
I don't believe that that is correct. This is hear-say, so take it with a
grain of salt:
Gygax was ousted by some of the other board members, who then tried to grab
the reins of the company. The problem was, the very reason they wanted to get
rid of Gygax was the same thing that let him run the company so well: he had
his hand in almost everything that went on. They proved unable to cope with
the situation that developed (lots of law suits because TSR slashed a number
of projects that involved free-lancers, according to rumours).
In desperation, TSR was sold for a pittance (stories put the figure as low as
$250,000). The purchaser was the grand-daughter of the man who wrote Buck
Rogers, and she bought it as a vehicle for merchandising her grand-father's
work. Her name eludes me at the moment, but almost anyone can dig it up.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huw Leonard, speaking only for himself unless you agree with him.
How's that for speculation and thin ice?
Richard C. Staats
>>> this. Could someone tell me what happened to Gygax and TSR?
>>
>>I do believe that his wife got it when they got a divorce and TSR has tried
>>hard to remove his name from as much as possible since.
>
I read Robbie's piece, but there must be more to the story than
this. There seems to be a trend for the really good, creative RPG
creators, writers and designers to get sucked off into computer
companies these days. I recently had the opportunity to visit a company
in downtown DC that does interactive CD type ``schtuff''. I was floored
to discover about 9 to 12 BIG TIME names in the RPG business (i.e. folks
with names like Gygax who you would recognize immediately) working for
this firm. To the last man and woman they quoted the reason for the shift
as monetary. One of the luminaries pointed out that his/her salary had
jumped from 20,000 dollars/year to 120,000 dollars/year in making the
change from paper to electronic media games! Yet, all of them sighed and
reminisced about the ``old days'' when all of their co-workers were gamers
and folks did things for ``love of gaming''.
What happened? (I know there are many game designers lurking out
there on this net! ;-) I'm really curious.)
In service,
Rich Staats
Matt Hurd
><3c2clt$6...@newsbf01.news.aol.com> <D0EqE...@wlbr.iipo.gtegsc.com>
>
>On testing of DUNGEON Magazine adventures, no, they are not playtested
>by TSR stafrf. They are playtested by outside players, some of whom at
>times are contributing writers, but not employees. And the playtesters,
>at least in my group, are hardly munchkins (Munchkins who appear at my
>table undergo a transformation to a non-Munchkin character or suffer a
>horrible fate). Playtest comments are frank and have resulted in
>significant changes i n the manuscript on several occasions.
>Just so the record is straight,
>Paul F. Culotta
paul,
i was not saying that the play testers for the dungeon adventures were
munchkins. i was saying that tsr does not have play testers for their
marketed material (outside of the magazine stuff) and if they were to get some
just to show they had some then they would probably get munchkins so that all
of there stuff passes with no problems... (and no. i do not know for a fact
that tsr has no play testers. i'm just going by the sudden stopage of play
testers names being listed in printed material and a great deal of non-playable
material being produced afterwards...)
just to set my end of the record straight.
Slacker 01
(Matt Hurd) writes:
>i was not saying that the play testers for the dungeon adventures were
>munchkins. i was saying that tsr does not have play testers for their
>marketed material (outside of the magazine stuff) and if they were to get
>some
>just to show they had some then they would probably get munchkins so that
>all
>of there stuff passes with no problems... (and no. i do not know for a
fact >that tsr has no playtesters
Well, you sure seem willing to insult people for something you "do not
know for a fact". As someone who has worked for TSR as a freelance editor
on their "marketed material," I can tell you the material -- at least what
I worked on -- definitely got playtested, and went through more revisions
than TSR really deserved for what they were paying me. (And no, like the
fella who playtested for Dungeon, we didn't use Munchkins either -- those
are trademarked to MGM.)
I don't do work for TSR anymore because of other commitments, but I can
say that if you set the verbal garbage disposal on reverse for every
ridiculous complaint, that you yourself admit you don't know what you're
talking about, then it's no surprise that TSR has stopped paying attention
to you; and it kind of begs the question about why you would think TSR --
or any company -- would find such ranting, uninformed feedback to be
valuable.
Best,
---Slacker01/AOL
jjs
: I can understand people disliking TSR for what they've done on the net and
: such? Did he not design this game you all love so much <AD&D>? He seems to
: have had put a lot of working into it, and don't see how the courts could have
: a given creative copyright over to his wife.
From what I understand, part of the hostility is because Dave Arneson had
a lot of input in the design and playtesting of the original D&D, but got
squat. Eventually TSR gave him a large settlement, but in the meantime
it got people upset.
John
Matt Hurd
Slacker 01 <slac...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <D0II1...@wlbr.iipo.gtegsc.com>, m...@WLV.IIPO.GTEGSC.COM
>(Matt Hurd) writes:
>
>Well, you sure seem willing to insult people for something you "do not
>know for a fact". As someone who has worked for TSR as a freelance editor
>on their "marketed material," I can tell you the material -- at least what
>I worked on -- definitely got playtested, and went through more revisions
>than TSR really deserved for what they were paying me. (And no, like the
>fella who playtested for Dungeon, we didn't use Munchkins either -- those
>are trademarked to MGM.)
do you know for a fact that ALL the stuff at tsr of recent print has been
playtested?? why is it that they do not give any credit for playtesting in
any of their printed material (outside of the dungeon magazine)?
did you write the fighter weapon specialization? the fighting style
specialization rules? the elf archer arrowing shooting absurdity? the dwarven
berserker combat machine? the bard super bladesinger-have-no-further-need-for-
a-fighter-character-type-kit? or any of the rules in any of the handbooks
outside of the Player's Handbook? if so, then how can you justify that these
rules are playable in a campaign where the monsters do not (by the rules) have
the same super-powers??? how can you justify that these rules do not disturb
game balance???
>
>I don't do work for TSR anymore because of other commitments, but I can
>say that if you set the verbal garbage disposal on reverse for every
>ridiculous complaint, that you yourself admit you don't know what you're
>talking about, then it's no surprise that TSR has stopped paying attention
>to you; and it kind of begs the question about why you would think TSR --
>or any company -- would find such ranting, uninformed feedback to be
>valuable.
my complaints would only be ridiculous to munchkins. it is only those type of
beings that would see it as threatening...
if tsr can open it's eyes, it will see that more than myself is unsatisfied
with their recent products. they'll see only the younger *new* gamers liking
their garbage, they'll see most of the old timers still playing the unsupported
1st edition rules, they'll see these same old timers scoffing and making jest
of the *new* 2nd editon optional rules where a 1st level elven fighter can fire
9 arrows in one round of combat and the 1st level warrior fighting with two
longswords getting 5 att every 2 rnds when he's using his two weapon fighting
style specialization against a hillgiant that only gets ONE attack and beating
the giant in four rounds!!!
it's critism (sp?) like mine and from others that a company should look at and
see why the arguments are being made and see if it can improve. tsr should be
writing more generic adventures rather than more rules. from the beginning of
the game the rules were to be a guidline on which a DM could base his campaign,
tsr now thinks that there should be a rule for everything so that the DM
doesn't have to make a call in the spur of the momment - he can just look up
the rule in one of his many books.
informed or not, feedback is neccessary for the proper growth of any system.
if the company does not agree with the feedback then they would have a valid
reason to ignore it, but if they get enough of the same feedback wouldn't it
then make sense to try and find out why they are getting so much of the same
feedback?
i was correct in saying that i didn't know for sure if tsr playtested any of
their new stuff - i have no proof and seeing as they do not print playtesters
names, i will continue to believe that they do not playtest.
i am also correct in saying that tsr is ignoring the old timers when they don't
make generic modules, killed the greyhawk world, and no longer supports 1st
edition rules... instead they make products such as the character lunchbox
kits, the character playing screens, the handbooks for every player idea in the
world (which people are now making fun of by saying things like The Complete
Blonde Cleric Handbook and such) etc.
Tim Dunn
>Did he not design this game you all love so much <AD&D>?
To be honest, I don't like D&D at all, and from the sound of it, a lot of other
people do not, either. That could be one problem.
>He seems to have had put a lot of working into it,
For another thing, it seems that a lot of people think he plagurized much
of it as well. Moreover, some people don't appreciate the stuff that he put
put out, such as the quote, "If you're not playing the game my way, you're
not playing D&D"
--
Jeff Kesselman
AAs an ex-Wi native let me fill you in. Ist not tha they gave
'copyright' to her. D&D was created by a group of people, not just
Gygax, and the Copyright was held by the company they formed- Tactical
Studies Rules (TSR). Gygax held a majoprity of TSR. WI is a marital
property state, baring any other agreements, all property By LAW must be
split 50/50 when a divorce occurs. As he owned that part of TSR, she was
entitled to half of it under martial property law. Thsi made Gygax's
remainign shares now a MINORITY intrest in the company. Someone else who
already held other shares bought his wife's shares and gaiend the
MAJORITY that Gygax used to have and took over the company.
Follow?
In terms of why he's disliked, Gygax always had a kidn of 'its MY gamne'
attitude, ignoring the huge amount of work put into extending it and
makign it complete by its fans. thsi tended to PO people. Ofcourse ther
CURRENT TSR's stance of 'itsMY game, and you can';t even TALK about it
withotu our permission' is even more annoying.
Jeff Kesselman
Slacker 01
Well, I want to correct the misperceptions that both you and the person to
whom you're responding seem to have. First off, no court ever gave Gary
Gygax's "creative copyright" (whatever that is) over to his wife; Gary
lost control of TSR to Lorraine Dille (who was in no way his wife),
because he failed to maintain a majority share of the stocks. When
Lorraine acquired a majority share (by buying some from Gary's son Luke,
I'm told) she walked in the next day, and fired him.
From what I understand, Gary's still happily married, his wife has never
owned TSR, and he's never gone to court over the ownership of TSR. He
simply acted like a bad businessman.
As to Dave Arneson, you're absolutely wrong to say he "didn't get squat."
Dave was a co-creator of the original D&D game, shared in the profits, and
took credit for his role in making the game. (More on that below.) That's
why his name appears on the original box as one of D&D's co-creators.
Dave's complaint came when Gary created AD&D, from D&D, and didn't give
Dave any credit or share of the profits. It eventually went to court
(several times, I think; I have the court decisions on computer disc
somewhere), and either by judgment or settlement Dave got some money for
his efforts.
What exactly were his efforts? Well, word is that Dave's the one who
actually created D&D from Gary's CHAINMAIL rules, and was the person that
first innovated the notion of a miniature as a "player character" persona
rather than as a representation of 10 or 100 soldier-men. When Gary heard
about what Dave had been doing (Wisconsin being a small gaming community
at that time), he contacted Dave, took his innovations, and wrote them
into a new game called D&D. (Dave didn't actually write any of the game;
Gary just used his design elements.) Because of that, Gary credited Dave
as a co-creator.
At least, that's how the story goes.
Best,
---Slacker01/AOL
Slacker 01
writes:
>For another thing, it seems that a lot of people think that he
plagiarized much of it as well....
Plagiarized......from where?? D&D was the first of its kind; exactly where
was Gary going to plagiarize from?
It sounds like you don't really understand the nature of your charge,
which is actually a pretty serious thing to say about someone.
Best,
---Slacker01/AOL
David W. Knott
>Plagiarized......from where?? D&D was the first of its kind; exactly where
>was Gary going to plagiarize from?
(such as those to Hobbits and Ents) were. The Tolkien estate did
subsequently take action in this matter, thus the current rules have
"Halflings" and "Treants" instead.
Kid
>
>failed
Wow. Rumors abound. I heard from some guy at Gen Con a couple of
years ago that Gygax was spending a lot of time on the AD&D cartoon
and stayed in LA for a long time (not minding the store) and eventually
had an affair and after divorce the wife who ran the company anyway
sued for controlling interest.
Maybe this should get made an (sub)urban legend?
Frank Mentzer, please post the correct rumor! :)
Jeff Kesselman
Well, he didn't state it very well, btu the charge is that in terms of
the original mosnters, races, etc. it was all a rip-off from LOTR
(tehre's absolutely NO arguing this point. If you don't believe me, find
the original 3 little books in the white box and read through them yourself.)
The rules, what there were, however orignated with TSR (i wont say Gygax
because i don't know who actaully did most of the rules design.
originally TSR was gygax, Dave Arneson, and the Blume Boys.)
Jeff kesselman
Steve Gilham
Also a number of Barsoomian creatures wandered in to original D&D, and
wandered back out when the Burroughs estate noticed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Gilham |GDS Ltd.,Wellington Ho. |Lives of great men all remind us
Software Specialist|East Road, Cambridge |We may make our lives sublime
steveg@ |CB1 1BH, UK |And departing, leave behind us
uk.gdscorp.com |Tel:(44)223-300111 x2904|Footprints in the sands of time.
Salzer Paul
: It has been several years since I've been into the RPG scene,
: but now I've started to read the newsgroups and find that TSR
: has become a name to inspire open loathing and (closely
: related?) that Gary Gygax no longer heads the company. The
: Rec.games.frp FAQ doesn't have very much to say about all
: this. Could someone tell me what happened to Gygax and TSR?
I heard that Gygax had a drug problem caused by the sudden
popularity of D&D. TSR felt that he was creating a bad
imagine, and that the gaming industry didn't need anymore
negative publicity (reports of suicides).
Events since the break-up:
Gygax wrote DANGEROUS JOURNEYS (which we called MYTHUS) for
GDW. GDW released several supplements since. DANGEROUS JOURNEYS
was suppose to be a mature AD&D, which must have angered
TSR, because TSR sued GDW. I don't know if Gygax still works
for GDW, or if he plans to write for another company.
TSR is still based in Lake Geneva, WI. The company still holds
GEN-CON (in Milwaukee now). The company is also working on
THE AMAZING ENGINE which looks like a multi-genre system. TSR
is also promoting its card came SPELLFIRE to combat Wizard's
of the Coast's DECKMASTERS series.
I hope this helped,
Paul Salzer (aka Khayman) SAL...@uwplatt.edu
Funny Story--I was at ROCK-CON two years ago, and went to the
TSR booth. There was a table marked for new products. I had to
laugh, because the table was EMPTY!!! :D
ALL GAMES MENTIONED IN THIS ARTICLE ARE COPYRIGHT BY THEIR
RESPECTIVE COMPANIES. I DO NOT CHALLENGE THAT COPYRIGHT IN
ANY WAY.
Great Cthulhu
>Why do people dislike Gygax? He comes across as a pompous, self-
>absorbed windbag in the things he's written during the last 10 years.
Just for the record, he comes across as a pompous, self-absorbed windbag in
person as well.
--
-Doug Gibson d...@wiffin.chem.ucla.edu
"Hell has our phone number." - DEC "I'll bet it does!" - Me
GS d-(+) H s+:+ !g p? au a- w+ v C++ UH++(++++) P--- L- 3- E N++ K W--- M+ V--
po- Y+ t+ 5- j R++ G+('') tv b+++ !D B--- e++>++++ u+ h---(*) f r+++ n- y+++
James T Gleason
That's cool. Could you tell us where they came from? (i.e.
Where did you get that information?)
--
------------ ---- /// -- \\\ | ||||
sig under construction
glea...@maroon.tc.umn.edu JT :)
<Hard Hat Area>
Jeff Kesselman
others. It makes interestign reading (thanks Joe ;) ).
Basicly, when Gygax did D&D he took Arneson's name of the books and tried
to claim that he owed Arneson no royalites becuase they were different
books from the original ones he and Arneson wrote.
The courts decided otherwise and ordered back royalties to be paid.
This, by the way, was a LEGITIMATE case of a derivitve work, and from
what I undertsand is what the law was intended to cover.
Jeff kesselman
Jeff Kesselman
Jeff Kesselman <jef...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <3cagc6$6...@illuminati.io.com>, jjs <j...@io.com> wrote:
>>aefig...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu wrote:
>>: I can understand people disliking TSR for what they've done on the net and
>>: such? Did he not design this game you all love so much <AD&D>? He seems to
>>: have had put a lot of working into it, and don't see how the courts could have
>>: a given creative copyright over to his wife.
>>
>>From what I understand, part of the hostility is because Dave Arneson had
>>a lot of input in the design and playtesting of the original D&D, but got
>>squat. Eventually TSR gave him a large settlement, but in the meantime
>>it got people upset.
>>
>>John
>>
>The Arneson v. TSR/Gygax case decision was posted last night with some
>others. It makes interestign reading (thanks Joe ;) ).
>Basicly, when Gygax did D&D he took Arneson's name of the books and tried
Typo warning, that shoudl have read AD&D (I wonder where that a got to,
it fell off and should be around here somewhere... ;) )
jk
Bryan J. Maloney
>jac...@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>>The demons and devils (called poofies and slurpies or something equally as
>>stupid in the new edition) were NOT made up, by and large. I can assure you
>>from my reading that nearly every one of them has appeared in some form or
>>another in fiction and occult literature well before Gygax began gaming.
> That's cool. Could you tell us where they came from? (i.e.
>Where did you get that information?)
This is off the top of my head. I'll have to dig my AD&D Monster Manual out
from storage to get detailed:
Orcus: Roman god of the Dead, later demonized by Christianity.
Demogorgon: A demonic figure who appeared in a Percy Shelly poem (Prometheus
Unbound?).
Manes: Latin spirits of dead family members--center of ancestor worship in
Rome. Demonized by Christianity.
Type IV demons: The Balrog from Lord of the Rings.
Type III demons: From the same source that produced the Naga (Indonesia and
India). By the way "Naga" is Indonesian for "dragon".
Succubus: European legends, common figure. Also overlapped with vampires
to some extent.
Asmodeus: Among the hierarchy of Hell, according to the Catholic church.
Dispater: Same as Asmodeus. Appeared as the lord of a mosque in Dante's
Divine Comedy.
Pit Fiend: Hell was called a "pit", demons were called "fiends"--do the math.
Bone Devil: Similar to a lesser devil in Dante's Divine Comedy.
Larvae: Another type of Roman spirit.
Tim Dunn
Then there was the rumor/urban legend that the whole Gygax - TSR break
was all just a well-played scam. Basically, it goes like this: TSR "fires"
Gygax. Gygax goes on board with a rival company. Gygax writes a crummy
game deliberately. TSR sues the rival company as the second half of a
one-two punch.
Wether or not it's actually "true" is another thing. It certainly is
plausible in light of past events. =)
See the smiley? No? Look closer.
--
david theon marshburn ii
: >The demons and devils (called poofies and slurpies or something equally as
: >stupid in the new edition) were NOT made up, by and large. I can assure you
: >from my reading that nearly every one of them has appeared in some form or
: >another in fiction and occult literature well before Gygax began gaming.
: That's cool. Could you tell us where they came from? (i.e.
: Where did you get that information?)
well, i'd like to know, too, i.e., whence came the various abyssmal
nasssties. however, i don't know any of the first ed. stuff, so can
someone at least give us the former names of the "poofies and slurpies"?
maybe then we can see where they came from. ^^^^^^^^^^^i love this!!!
david
**************************************************************************
|
| Internet?
David Marshburn |
mars...@wfu.edu | What kinda fish you catch with that?
|
|
Jeff Kesselman
lost, SOME historical facts emerge:
Q. What ever happened to Dave Arneson?
A. Dave and Gary, as co-authors of D&D, had a 10% royalty from TSR (
which at the time was ALSO owned by Gygax) which they split 5%/5%.
From the court's finding (Arneson V. TSR/Gygax), it looks to me like
perhapse Gary played some games to decrease the amoutn of royalty paid
out and DEFINATELY tried to cut Dave otu of the royalties completely
on AD&D (the courst ruled that AD&D was a derivative work of D&D, BTW
and awarded Dave damages. This is an example of a REAL case of a
derivitive work and the kind of abuse the law was designed to prevent.
Compare this to what TSR is now CLAIMING the law means...)
Jeff Kesselman
Geoffrey C Grabowski
david theon marshburn ii <mars...@wfu.edu> wrote:
>well, i'd like to know, too, i.e., whence came the various abyssmal
>nasssties. however, i don't know any of the first ed. stuff, so can
>someone at least give us the former names of the "poofies and slurpies"?
>maybe then we can see where they came from. ^^^^^^^^^^^i love this!!!
>david
> mars...@wfu.edu | What kinda fish you catch with that?
Okay, well, T$R will doubtless write me nasty letters unless I
say that I am in no way challenging any of the several zillion trademarks
that may be hidden somewhere in this post, ackowledge them as entirely
the property of T$R, and express the fact that I really wouldn't want to
challenge them anyway, since I wouldn't want to use them, I play more
interesting systems, so they're perfectly welcome to them, to keep, to
cherish, to have and to hold.
Reading from my original (1st ed) books and the compendiums:
(this is helpful if you have 1st ed supps and no 1st ed books)
Changes in main rules: The spell Cacodemon was removed from 2nd ed. It's a
7th level MU spell that allows you to go through a big song and dance and
conjure and bind demons.
Devils became Baatezu
1st 2nd
Lemure Lemure
Styx Devil Amnizu
Horned Devil Cornugon
Ice Devil Gelugon
Pit Fiend Pit Fiend
Nupperibo Nupperibo
Spined Devil Spinagon
Abishai Abishai
Bearded Devil Barbazu
Erinyes Erinyes
Horned Devil Hamatula
Bone Devil Osyluth
They also deleted the Archdevils and a slew of other Devils, in fact, the
whole Infernal Hierarchy. Guess they didn't want Mom getting offended at
seeing stats for Beelzebub
Deodands became Gehreleth but retained their names
Demons became Tanari'i, most names stayed unchanged. The numericals were
deleted though. The infinite layers of the Abyss used to just be 666 in
number.
Vrock are Type I
Hezrou are Type II
Glabrezu are Type III
Nalfeshnee are Type IV
Marilith are Type V
Balors are Type VI
Likewise, all the Demon Lords got vaped. Goess they didn't need Mom
seeing those stats for Demogorgon either.
Daemons got to become Yugoloths (from a horrible monster to a cheap
foreign car in just one eidtion!). In all cases, the -oloth was put in
place of a -daemon suffix, and the Charonadaemons got the axe, as did ol
Anthraxus, king of the Daemons, and Charon, boatman of the styx.
The didn't used to be an endless war between the Lower Planes.
Check out the 1st ed. books or The Dragon circa the #60s, I think, for Ed
Greenwood's excellent works on The Nine Hells. Yeah, I collected The
Dragon from ~#60 to over #130, back when it was good...
YHS,
G.
"AD&D: You can travel among the infinite crystal spheres and still find
your Kheowhathisname's Ointment."
--
--Geoffrey Grabowski|gcg...@pitt.edu|Undergrad, U.Pittsburgh|PoliSci/Econ
--[O] "So put a candle in the window
--[O] and a kiss upon his lips
--[O] while the dish outside the window fills with rain"
P Ward
and the guys desgined the stats for em, but they did do the stats. Probably
took at least an hour or so a demon.
Mind you, I tend to have a vague idea of the stats and then just make it up
on the fly anyway, the game goes faster, and the monster falls down when it
feels right, as long as the players don't look at me in horror when the
Dragon takes another volley of Meteor swarms and doesn;t go down.
Phil
Paul Wolfe
Those were the days, when the game meant more than the price,and TSR
still had some portion of their soul left. I find it ironic that the
"original" game "borrowed heavily" from Tolkien and a few others,
however, today, type up a cool addendum to their haphazard work and
they call out the Polyester Dragons, (with a long list of legal spells).
And another reason for the Devil to Baatewhatever and Demons to the
Tanawhatthefuck, is so they could copyright the names....mo money, mo
money.... Stole from themselves this time...
There, my two cents are well spent....
Greg Dinkelman
: James T Gleason (glea...@maroon.tc.umn.edu) wrote:
: : >The demons and devils (called poofies and slurpies or something equally as
: : Where did you get that information?)
: well, i'd like to know, too, i.e., whence came the various abyssmal
: nasssties. however, i don't know any of the first ed. stuff, so can
: someone at least give us the former names of the "poofies and slurpies"?
: maybe then we can see where they came from. ^^^^^^^^^^^i love this!!!
: david
When I read Dante's Inferno, an awful lot of it seemed familiar. Actually,
although I don't have any official statements, and wouldn't want to offend
anyone, it looked to me like they just sat back, pulled out Dante and
whatever they could remember from Bible study classes for names of the
arch-devils. I'd have to pull out my copy of Inferno to try to check the
names of the planes.
Oh, and Dante didn't have a 5-headed dragon living at the gate to the Hells,
so at least something was original. (Not the name Tiamat, though. They
pulled that from some other mythic source somewhere.)
Greg
--Poofies and slurpies forever!
(I think James should copyright that phrase. It's perfect.)
Andy Chance
Bryan J. Maloney (jac...@sonata.cc.purdue.edu) wrote:
: In article <glea0015....@maroon.tc.umn.edu> glea...@maroon.tc.umn.edu (James T Gleason) writes:
: >jac...@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
: >>The demons and devils (called poofies and slurpies or something equally as
: >>stupid in the new edition) were NOT made up, by and large. I can assure you
: >>from my reading that nearly every one of them has appeared in some form or
: >>another in fiction and occult literature well before Gygax began gaming.
: > That's cool. Could you tell us where they came from? (i.e.
: >Where did you get that information?)
Several of the "Arch-Devils" were mentioned in the Bible as names for
the Devil himself. Beaalzebul and Mammon both fall into this category.
-Chance
*******************************************************************************
* Andy Chance (N7XNV) * He is no fool, who gives up what he *
* cha...@pioneer.nevada.edu * cannot keep, to gain what he cannot lose.*
* University of Nevada, Las Vegas * -Jim Elliot *
* Honors Program * Capitalism is the uneven distribution of *
* College of Business & Economics * wealth, Socialism is the even *
* <>< * distribution of poverty. *
*******************************************************************************
David W. Knott
>Oh, and Dante didn't have a 5-headed dragon living at the gate to the Hells,
>so at least something was original. (Not the name Tiamat, though. They
>pulled that from some other mythic source somewhere.)
a monster or deity defeated by Marduk.
The five-headed dragon was an obvious invention by TSR -- having come up
with five varieties of evil dragon, they simply combined all five of them
to make Tiamat. That seems the most likely explanation, unless an old-timer
from TSR has a different story.
Bryan J. Maloney
>Greg Dinkelman <dink...@lynx.cs.washington.edu> writes:
>
>>Oh, and Dante didn't have a 5-headed dragon living at the gate to the Hells,
>>so at least something was original. (Not the name Tiamat, though. They
>>pulled that from some other mythic source somewhere.)
>
>The name Tiamat is from Babylonian or Sumerian mythology and corresponds to
>a monster or deity defeated by Marduk.
>
>The five-headed dragon was an obvious invention by TSR -- having come up
>with five varieties of evil dragon, they simply combined all five of them
Actually, Tiamat, the great Mother Chaos, was depicted as a dragon or
draconic creature when Marduk fought and destroyed her.
He then made the world from her body parts. Thus, the world is the corpse
of a demonic being.
This myth, of course, comes from the point in Babylonian history when Marduk
was considered king of the gods, having replaced Anu, who had slid into
dotage.