Quote from: Brad;1101060Okay, another Jim Ward story that might not be true because I could never find any legal evidence...[Scandalous statment will] Hopefully that'll be in the book.

Also, Kuntz is SUPER crotchety, anyway. I think it is fairly accurate his contribution to D&D has been severely downplayed; it's indisputable that he helped Gygax iron out most of what we consider the main parts of an RPG campaign. But again, old and crotchety...

Not sure why people would want to read that kind of stuff.  And it wouldn't make Rob good for him to bring that kind of thing.

While Kuntz has made contributions, I also think he might be trying to claim too much nowadays.

Quote from: Razor 007;1101357It would be awesome, if kids of both co-creators would do a public event and bury the hatchet.

That's assuming there are bad feelings with the kids, which I don't believe is true.  But even public events aren't going to do anything like that.  WoTC when they announced 3e actually had both Gary and Dave together as guests.  The problem is, this view is more of the public.  Heck, one of Jack Kirby's kids was complementary of Stan Lee during the dual induction of them as Disney Legends, and people still chime in on who did what.  That kind of stuff is never going away.

Quote from: EOTB;1101388I'm gonna go full tin-foil hat for a moment.  I acknowledge this.  But it seems there might be some threads and patterns at play here.  I'm just tying together pieces of info left around the internet and could be completely wrong.  But there's a whole lot of weird going on with this article and this timing from multiple sides.

To me this seems driven mainly by Rob Kuntz.  He has some bile, whether created before Gary's death or after, and now he's going to do as much damage as possible.  There's no fact checking in that article; for a filmmaker who continues to present himself as a simple unbiased historian who's definitely not doing a combined operation in conjunction with this kotoku author, it seems to get brough up wherever the movie is discussed.  And any journalist worth their salt doesn't take one angry guy's word for it unless they really want to.  Let's take a look at what just a few searches brings up on good old Rob's migrating attitudes over the years - something you'd think a journalist would at least mention, if not challenge him on.

Personally, I think it's mostly Kuntz.  One thing to note in the article that Cecelia D'Anastasio tends to let the speakers tell the story and while sometimes making a few judgements, she usually lets what they say shape the article.  Kuntz is the one who comes off the most critical of Gary here, not any of the other folks.

The problem with Rob is that he seems to have burned many bridges over time.  He actually had a shot with the rise of 3e and the third party publishers, but the three folks he went with, Necromancer, Kenzer, and Troll Lord all had issues with his modules, include a public blow-up between Clark Peterson and him.  Then he exited Castle Zagyg.  Ever since then, most of his stuff has been self published on his own whim.  He did release his "Castle notes" a while back on DVDs and I don't believe they were well received, based on what reviews are read online.  All the while, he's grown more and more critical of the gaming industry, alluding to thinking that the commercial market make games less creative.

I think Rob suffers from what a lot of creative types may suffer in gaming--a good player and DM, not a great writer.  I mean, in this day and age, now with the OGL and the retro-clone movement, he could really take advantage of those opportunities.  He hasn't seemed to be able to do that.  Whatever the reason, it's not for a lack of opportunity or market.

Quote from: EOTB;1101388So let's think about everything that's happened this year with Kotaku, Gygax, and Kuntz.  

I don't think it's out of the ballpark to speculate that Kotaku wants to de-emphasize Gary's legacy.  The author of the article has already stated "And yet, perhaps Gygax has enjoyed enough time on D&D's altar of hero worship."  That's one of the reasons that it seemed weird at GaryCon when she wrote the article sympathetic to Gail Gygax but negative about GaryCon itself and also Tenkar.  Remember that?  At the time people shrugged and said "it could have been worse".  

So the 1st article seemed to use a in-fight between the family to throw shade at GaryCon and Tenkar, neither of whom are beloved by certain communities.  

Reading the actual article in question,

https://kotaku.com/fantasys-widow-the-fight-over-the-legacy-of-dungeons-1833127876

I am perplexed how this article throws shade at GaryCon.  The article doesn't judge GaryCon itself negatively at all, either from the author or quoted subject (Gail).  Tenkar is another matter, as he has pretty much spent way too much time with a grudge, and his responses really come off as paranoid--it's pretty clear he's taken a grudge with her way too far over time.  Tenkar and perhaps Frank Mentzer (by mentioning his ousting from the con) might look bad, but that doesn't really make the Convention itself look bad.

The article on Gail pretty much comes across as fair, and its more about Gail and her beliefs and conflicts and mindset than anybody else's.  It also doesn't have a lot of the ideological stuff about gaming and author value judgement Kotaku might be known for--this type of article could have been in the Chicago Tribune or New York Times.

(Disclaimer, I'm the one who screen-captured Tenkar alluding to Gail as a C--t, and I'm very sympathetic to Gail, so those are my biases).

I'm just not seeing any sort of coordinated effort to take Gary Gygax down by people with these articles.  In the newer article, the only person I see with an axe to grind is Rob based on how he words his statements, the others come off very reasonably.

Quote from: JeremyR;1101371And if you've read it, you'll see that it dispels any myth that Arneson was a "rules light" guy.  Probably the first and only RPG that has a separate to hit for when your character fights a lion. And figuring out experience for defeated opponents requires multiplying three fractions together.

Yeah, maybe that's why it never garnered a big enough player base to keep it alive.

Quote from: EOTB;1101388So here's where I speculate and draw a speculative conclusion that everyone involved is trying to use the gaming community's affection as either leverage for revenge and/or gain.

Always follow the money.

Always.

Thank you EOTB for the excellent post.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1101473Always follow the money.

Always.

That assumes that everybody is evil, cynical, or has an ulterior motive.  Or that it's even money based.

There are still some areas of that analysis that are big stretches.  (Again, EOTB admits to it being "tin foil" stuff).

For instance, thinking that just because the film maker is using the first name of the journalist covering him that they're entangled together...that's just overthinking things.

The Paul Stromberg theories also gets contradicted by the fact that Paul has sold some of Gary Gygax's stuff, and is working with Gail on archiving Gary's stuff.  He actually did an Reddit IAMA earlier this year about that.  If he was part of any conspiracy to "tear Gary down", it would hurt him, and that's assuming he is in it "just for the money", which I doubt.  If anything, he has an interest in making sure both men are appreciated and remembered.  It would make no sense for him to "diminish Gygax".  Paul has contributed to several historical volumes such as the Art and Arcana volume, and other works, so I think he has more or less proved himself as a sincere historian.  

Honestly, I don't think even Rob is motivated by money as much as something personal or even a personal quirkiness.  He's been real eccentric over the years.

Quote from: JRT;1101496That assumes that everybody is evil, cynical, or has an ulterior motive.  Or that it's even money based.

There are still some areas of that analysis that are big stretches.  (Again, EOTB admits to it being "tin foil" stuff).

For instance, thinking that just because the film maker is using the first name of the journalist covering him that they're entangled together...that's just overthinking things.

The Paul Stromberg theories also gets contradicted by the fact that Paul has sold some of Gary Gygax's stuff, and is working with Gail on archiving Gary's stuff.  He actually did an Reddit IAMA earlier this year about that.  If he was part of any conspiracy to "tear Gary down", it would hurt him, and that's assuming he is in it "just for the money", which I doubt.  If anything, he has an interest in making sure both men are appreciated and remembered.  It would make no sense for him to "diminish Gygax".  Paul has contributed to several historical volumes such as the Art and Arcana volume, and other works, so I think he has more or less proved himself as a sincere historian.  

Honestly, I don't think even Rob is motivated by money as much as something personal or even a personal quirkiness.  He's been real eccentric over the years.

You don't need an evil cabal, you only need people with converging interests acting in their own interest.

As for following the money...

People do bad stuff for a number of reasons: Envy, Jealousy, Revenge, Fame, Power, Sex, Love, Money.

I'll know when JRT can no longer use the internet because you'll be able to type the word "Gygax" on a forum without him appearing.  But he'll never get more than 50% of the experience points awarded on an adventure.

And JRT, I didn't say that Stormberg was tearing Gygax down or diminishing him.  That's a bad-cop job.  Stormberg builds Arneson up throughout.

Quote from: EOTB;1101514I'll know when JRT can no longer use the internet because you'll be able to type the word "Gygax" on a forum without him appearing.  But he'll never get more than 50% of the experience points awarded on an adventure.

Nah, I've left a lot of forums alone for several years.  Most of my time has been here and very little posting.  

QuoteAnd JRT, I didn't say that Stormberg was tearing Gygax down or diminishing him.  That's a bad-cop job.  Stormberg builds Arneson up throughout.

You're still implying there's some big conspiracy between all the members of this article, some sort of coordinated good-cop, bad-cop thing.  I don't buy it.

Well, Paul Stormberg is Rob Kuntz's business partner in Three Line Studios and literally the publisher of his Dave Arneson's True Genius book so it's not like the connection between them is a deep secret (though of course the article didn't mention that). OTOH Stormberg is also working with and, at least for a while seemed to be positioned as the public face of the Gygax Estate (when he did that out-of-the-blue Reddit AMA about all the cool unpublished IP in Gary's archives earlier this year) so he can't really be credibly portrayed as some sort of anti-Gygax crusader, which is apparently Rob's latest angle.

Quote from: JRT;1101517You're still implying there's some big conspiracy between all the members of this article, some sort of coordinated good-cop, bad-cop thing.  I don't buy it.

No, you keep implying there's some big conspiracy between all the members (edit) of the article (/edit) which is certainly not happening.  I'm noting that there's a journalist who's 2-for-2 in dropping big Gygax stories when old school D&D-related things are happening and not before or after, that make people look bad who aren't necessarily beloved in her wider circles.  Perhaps that's just calendar crapshoot bingo.  I don't need every person I interact with to be on board with the others.  I just need them to want to interact with me for some reason that furthers my own purpose - even if they're simply "useful".  I may even be willing to help them achieve whatever petty or not-petty goal motivates them.

Quote from: JRT;1101496That assumes that everybody is evil, cynical, or has an ulterior motive.

Yes.

Humans aren't that complicated.

The reason you always follow the money is because the money trail is the easiest to track and verify. In cases where envy, jealousy or other motives exist, following the money trail still does the trick because money is the major way how we interact with the world, and thus becomes the trackable signifier of other motives.

There has been this weird on-off think with Kuntz over the decades with him friends with Gary, some sort of falling out, kinda friends, stabbing him in the back (after Gary is dead)... and you have to wonder what this is all about. I still do not understand it.

I'd known of Rob's odd attitude for a while now via other connections. But did not know the rabbit hole was this deep. And may be deeper. I got the impression it was just low level sniping, much like Arneson did on occasion. But that Kotaku is anything but low level?

I have a feeling money may not be the prime mover in this. It reads like a grudge, done to spite someone. It certainly contradicts parts of what others from the original group have recounted.

But who knows? I doubt we ever will know the why of all this.

Quote from: Omega;1101547But who knows? I doubt we ever will know the why of all this.

My opinion is that it can be found in Rob Kuntz's own words in the True Genius of Dave Arneson. Basically boils down to that he felt he contributed creatively during the genesis of D&D by running and designing El Raja Key, and later Greyhawk itself. But was rewarded by working stock at early TSR and having most if not nearly of all his ideas for published material shot down.

Finally left along with the most people from the Twin Cities including Arneson. To what appears to me a classic case of a clash of workplace expectations. Mind you this all occur in 1975 and 1976. D&D was a thing but it wasn't a mega hit yet. Then AD&D and TSR making millions occured in the last 1970s.

I had some personal experience with small business that echoes what Kuntz wrote.

The upshot we will never know exactly what happened because there is too much emotion wrapped up it. But it is a major clue as to the source of Kuntz's motivations. You don't have to believe me, read True Genius for yourself. Fortunately it is one of the more clearly written sections.

Quote from: estar;1101557Mind you this all occur in 1975 and 1976. D&D was a thing but it wasn't a mega hit yet. Then AD&D and TSR making millions occured in the last 1970s.

That's a key point that always seems to get lost in the "Dave Arneson = Jack Kirby" narrative. By pretty much everyone's admission Dave Arneson's substantive contribution to D&D was done by mid-1973 (at the latest) and he had nothing at all to do with anything that came after (i.e. pretty much everything people think of when they think of D&D - the AD&D hardbacks, Basic boxed sets, modules, World of Greyhawk, etc). He did work at TSR for about a year c. 1976 but the only things that came out under his byline during that time were a couple of articles in TSR's house magazines (the D&D Blackmoor supplement listing him as author predates his actual employment at TSR, and by many accounts was no more than ~50% actually written by him and the material that was - mostly the Temple of the Frog adventure, is material that originated in that same pre-publication era: we know that Twin Cities players were playing that adventure c. 1972). By the time D&D became a commercial juggernaut c. 1979-82 and made Gary Gygax rich, Arneson had been completely out of the picture for many years, and to the extent his contribution to D&D ever amounted to something more than ideas - that any of the actual written text of the 1974 D&D rules is directly attributable to him, which is debatable (at best) - it had long since been superseded and replaced (and yet TSR continued to pay him a 5% author royalty on every copy of the D&D Basic Set - his contention in the lawsuits was that he felt he should also get that royalty (and co-author credit) for AD&D rulebooks and (A)D&D-branded modules and accessories*).

The Arneson = Kirby comparison would only been apt if Kirby had never returned to Marvel after WWII but nevertheless came knocking in the 60s claiming he was owed 50% ownership and royalties for all of Marvel's titles (over and above the royalties and credits he was receiving for Captain America) because Marvel's "house" art style was derived from work he did there in the 40s.

*From what I understand (from Empire of the Imagination, IIRC) the ultimate settlement DID give Arneson a royalty on AD&D rulebooks (at 2.5% instead of 5%) but didn't give him co-author credit (though if you compare printings of the AD&D DMG you'll see that his name does appear in the "Acknowledgments" section of later printings after not being included in early ones) and didn't give him any royalty for modules or other accessory products (dice, geomorph sets, etc.)

In nutshell everything I read and researched on the subject can be summarized as Dave Arneson is the inventor of tabletop roleplaying, and Gary Gygax is the inventor of Dungeon & Dragons the first published tabletop roleplaying game.

I am leading with that as a response to T. Foster is that everything he say is true but it only pertains to Dungeons & Dragon the first published tabletop roleplaying game. Which would have not existed without Dave Arneson having invented tabletop roleplaying.

There are two equal and co-dependent halves to the path that lead to our hobby and industry. People need to keep in mind that prior to the Lake Geneva Blackmoor sessions, he was running the Blackmoor for nearly two years (late 1970 to fall of 1972). About the same amount of time Gygax took from running Greyhawk with his manuscript to the publication of D&D, from late 1972 to early 1974.

Wasn't a case of Dave having a good idea. It was a case of Dave developing a novel type of game but was an indifferent writer and was better suited to teaching other his ideas face to face. A case Gygax was a type of gamer that had the discipline to see a published project through. Just as important while Gygax didn't invent tabletop roleplaying, he was skilled enough of a game designer to create a new tabletop roleplaying game that was fun, endurable, and compelling to play. Enough so that his game's fundamental concepts are still in use today.

And the circumstances had a role to play as well. My view that the Greyhawk was a campaign focused on dungeon exploration because Dave opted to bring referee the Blackmoor Dungeon when he went down to Lake Geneva. He opted to run the Blackmoor Dungeon because he had to travel and it was a part of the campaign he could easily transport. The circumstance could been easily different.

There been other controversial disparate creative parings the aforementioned Stan Lee & Jack Kirby. There is the well known Steve Job, Steve Wozinak. In Gygax & Arneson I feel we have two men who have very different temperaments and skills outside of gaming Whose creative legacy are highly dependent on each other.  Gygax work by far is the more visible and successful of the two, but Dave's work is the foundation on which it all rests. And it was work honed by nearly two years of running Blackmoor that was continued independently of Gygax's work on OD&D and Greyhawk.

The question one need to be answer are

• Would have Dungeons & Dragons be written without Dave's help or running the Lake Geneva session?
• What was work involved by Dave Arneson in developing the idea of a tabletop roleplaying campaign through his Blackmoor Campaign.
• What would have happened to Dave Arneson innovations if Gygax never had written Dungeons & Dragons?

Quote from: Omega;1101547There has been this weird on-off think with Kuntz over the decades with him friends with Gary, some sort of falling out, kinda friends, stabbing him in the back (after Gary is dead)... and you have to wonder what this is all about. I still do not understand it.

Over the years, Rob has burned enough bridges and walked away from enough business partners under acrimonious circumstances (often with advance in the pocket and no manuscript to show, or unpaid art in other instances when it was his own outfit) that you can see a pattern.