"Oh yeah? You think you can write the definitive edition of MY game!? Well I'll write a definitive edition that is TEN TIMES BIGGER, call it the ADVANCED edition, and explicitly call your campaign UNMEANINGFUL!"
You can really cherry pick Gary's quotes on "here's an idea" to put together an entire manual that makes him seem like a tyrant who only tolerated one specific way to play. You'd have to ignore all the preambles, introductions, essays, and people's memories of his games, wherein he espoused the exact opposite (although he also ran games with a strong "I'm in charge here," which fits the following guess as to why as well).
The man spoke with an authoritative and strong voice when pitching rules -- I'm guessing because in the wargaming community, especially within the journals he wrote and edited before D&D -- hedging and being uncertain literally showed weakness that prompted attacks on ideas. That absolutist phrasing was pretty common in wargaming journals of the era as far as I've read, although my experience is limited compared to some.
Chris Holmes - Oh, I picked up that you weren't really serious. It just made me consider why he wrote such strong "commandments" bracketed by "be flexible" essays. It's something that most other D&D authors didn't do.
Sorry for taking a joke serious without making it clear: yep, joke understood.
I should certainly hope so. Otherwise, he couldn't run a meaningful campaign.
ReplyDeleteSorry guys. I'm afraid he was never that organized.
ReplyDeleteChris Holmes But meaningfulness!
ReplyDeleteMaybe that was Gary's subtle dig at Holmes.
ReplyDelete"Oh yeah? You think you can write the definitive edition of MY game!? Well I'll write a definitive edition that is TEN TIMES BIGGER, call it the ADVANCED edition, and explicitly call your campaign UNMEANINGFUL!"
Chris Holmes I am thoroughly disillusioned.
ReplyDeleteBeloch Shrike Unmeaningful should be the word we in DIY circles use when we are really, really disappointed.
ReplyDeleteIt's like nothing means anything.
ReplyDeleteWow I hope everyone is being fecitious.
ReplyDeleteChris Holmes of course. I will still be running my weekly Holmes can in portown.
ReplyDeleteWell, sure, you can run a meaningful can without a calendar Herman Klang. But not a meaningful campaign. It's like life has lost all meaning. :-(
ReplyDeleteI tried a campaign calendar once, but my players ignored me. ;-P
ReplyDeleteMichael has a good point, depending on your players, you might not need a lot of things. But do them anyway if they bring you joy.
ReplyDeletehttps://lh3.googleusercontent.com/fq2QojnzpoS4V_qWcAu-W3K-RG7qjBkrbE4qLe47zp6TjflOP13Hz_C927XTMCKhU_ppOGD6WRib58_P-mBBGHCnu6qmMn2u-Xw=s0
ReplyDeleteObviously telling people they were doing it all wrong brought Gary joy.
ReplyDeleteYou can really cherry pick Gary's quotes on "here's an idea" to put together an entire manual that makes him seem like a tyrant who only tolerated one specific way to play. You'd have to ignore all the preambles, introductions, essays, and people's memories of his games, wherein he espoused the exact opposite (although he also ran games with a strong "I'm in charge here," which fits the following guess as to why as well).
ReplyDeleteThe man spoke with an authoritative and strong voice when pitching rules -- I'm guessing because in the wargaming community, especially within the journals he wrote and edited before D&D -- hedging and being uncertain literally showed weakness that prompted attacks on ideas. That absolutist phrasing was pretty common in wargaming journals of the era as far as I've read, although my experience is limited compared to some.
You make a good point Evan. I was making a joke, perhaps in poor taste.
ReplyDeleteChris Holmes - Oh, I picked up that you weren't really serious. It just made me consider why he wrote such strong "commandments" bracketed by "be flexible" essays. It's something that most other D&D authors didn't do.
ReplyDeleteSorry for taking a joke serious without making it clear: yep, joke understood.