All of these are from the AD&D 1st edition DMG (page 7), and pretty well define important aspects of RPGs, not to mention express what a fucking genius Gary Gygax really is.

Gary said:
1. "As a participant in the game, I would not care to have anyone telling me exactly what must go into my campaign, and how it must be handled; If so, why not play some game like chess? "

This is in direct contradiction to makers of games who want those games to be complete little microcosms, and who want to TELL you how their game should be run.  That's a big part of why I say these games are not RPGs.

2. "As the author I also realize that there are limits to my creativity and imagination.  Others will think of things I didn't, and devise things beyond my capability."

Leaving room open in a system allows the GM and even players to come up with ideas that will often be better than what the Game Designer could have thought up.  Notice that people sometimes accused Gary of being megalomaniacal, but he was at least humble enough to recognize that he is not the ultimate fountain of wisdom, and to design his game based on that principle.  Unlike many so-called RPG designers today, who want to impose their wills on gaming groups out of a certainty that whatever you thought up would be stupid in comparison to their sheer brilliance.

3. "As an active Dungeon Master I kept a careful watch for things which would tend to complicate matters without improving them..."

So much for gimmicky mechanics.

4. "...(and) rules which lessened the fantastic and unexpected in favour of the mundane and the ordinary"

That's yet another frequent problem of many games these days; they encourage routine and mundanity in the system. Players are encouraged to conform to gimmicky systems and funnel their creativity into how they will "define stakes" or where they will put their tokens or how many beans they will invest in their action; but the one thing they're not allowed to do in these games is roleplay outside of the rules.

These are some points that define what a GOOD RPG is, and what a REAL RPG should be, and that are as true today as when they were written all those years ago.  

RPGPundit

Funny, I was reading through an old copy of the 1e Dungeon Master's Guide the other day, and thinking the same thing. Gary's advice in that book still holds true today, and will continue to be valuable advice in the future.

Hmmm ... perhaps those points help explain why Gary isn't a fan of 3e D&D?  (Especially points 3 & 4?)  

The 1e DMG is one of the best sources of practical advice for running an RPG campaign, ever.  You definitely get the sense that a lot of what's between those covers was obtained through years of experience.

That said, there are some disconnects between what EGG wrote in his introductions and what actually made it into the core books as rules.  For example, I'd say point 3 was violated a few times: unarmed combat, psionics, the full initiative system, etc.  (As a complete aside, the biggest "huh?" for me was in his foreword to the PHB, where he stated there were no arbitrary limits placed on female strength or male charisma...then a couple of pages later there was the strength chart, with its arbitrary limits on female strength...)

Now we know that a lot of the cruft that had attached itself to the system was included by Gygax under protest as a concession to the Blumes or to grognards who wanted more wargame-oriented rules, but I'm willing to bet most of us didn't know this in the days before the internet.  Some of those rules were head-scratchingly obscure, even for a kid who'd spent much of his 12th year learning to play Squad Leader by himself.

That's all nitpicking on my part, though.  I take the 1e DMG with me to any game I run, whether or not it's AD&D.  The stuff between the covers is that good.

That is all advice I try to follow. I don't always succeed, but I always try.

-clash

Quote from: AkrasiaHmmm ... perhaps those points help explain why Gary isn't a fan of 3e D&D?  (Especially points 3 & 4?)  

Based on what he's said about 3e and his own preferences these days, Gygax prefers rules-light systems. Hence his approval of Castles & Crusades. I personally don't see that 3 & 4 apply to 3e; if anything, 3e is the opposite to those points. But YMMV.

The Colonel is correct.

Quote from: AkrasiaHmmm ... perhaps those points help explain why Gary isn't a fan of 3e D&D?  (Especially points 3 & 4?)  

I don't think you need much more explanation beyond the fact that I'd probably still have a bad feeling about anything called "D&D" after all Gary went through. It probably doesn't have much at all to do with D&D's system or current design.

RPGPundit

The 1e DMG is a goldmine of great insights and tips.  There's actuallly advice in there, while many books "GM Advice" sections are very light weight indeed.

It's remarkable that this advice seems almost "fresh" when read about 30 years later!

I actually think that - when well-written - GM Advice sections, examples of play, and "what is roleplaying" segments can be some of the most insightful parts of an RPG.

"What is roleplaying?" bits ought to let you know what the game designers consider an RPG to be. GM advice should, at their best, say "Here's how the game designers like to run this game" or "We think that this style of GMing plays to our game's strengths".

And the example of play really, really shouldn't be an afterthought. It's the game designer's chance to show the reading public what they think an absolutely (arche)typical session of their game would be like.

The 1e AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide scores well on all these counts - the example of play is pretty much a manifesto for "Gygaxian" gaming. Heroquest is also really good at this (and provides good examples of play for pretty much every rule in the rulebook), as did Runequest (with "Rurik's Saga"). Vampire: the Masquerade's GMing advice, however, neither plays to the system's strengths nor resembles most Vampire games I've seen (which tend to degenerate into "gothic superheroes"); while I can imagine that Mark Rein*Hagen runs Vampire like that, it's not the best use of the storyteller system. And the number of games I've seen where these segments have been total afterthoughts is kind of depressing.

Quote from: ColonelHardisson... I personally don't see that 3 & 4 apply to 3e; if anything, 3e is the opposite to those points. But YMMV.

Point 3 & 3e is definitely debatable, but point 4 certainly weighs against 3e.  IME and IMO of course.

I was looking at the 1st Ed. Player's handbook tonight.  A few observations:

* Players are told they need to have goals
* Players are told they need to work together
* Players are told *not* to buy/read the Dungeon Master's Guide
* There is no mention of a "Rule Zero" in the Player's Handbook -- unless the DM tells them otherwise, player's would have no reason to believe the DM wasn't following all the rules and making all dice rolls fairly, like in any other game
* Player's are told the DM is the final word on questions about the rules for that particular campaign

About a year back (maybe less), a poster on RPGNet and Dragonsfoot, JimLotFP, started a 101 Days of 1e AD&D thread.  His initial posts on the game led me to reread the essays on good play in the back of the PHB.  I hadn't read them for quite some time.

I wonder how many people have skipped over that stuff.  It makes me sad to think about it in a way, because the text contains some of the best advice on player preparation and teamwork ever.  Much like their counterparts in the DMG, the player essays are obviously the result of many, many sessions of experience and are presented as practical and pragmatic advice.

Great advice on designing and running games in the DMG, great advice on playing them in the PHB.  Damn I love those books.

Gary Gygax is a wise man.What other game designers do you like and what words of their wisdom would you share with us?

QuoteAs a participant in the game, I would not care to have anyone telling me exactly what must go into my campaign, and how it must be handled; If so, why not play some game like chess?

Gary must have had an embolism after that, because I clearly recall him crapping on in Dragon about how if you didn't use the rules as written you weren't playing D&D.