More D&D history help

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I have acquired a wealth of information regarding the history of Dungeons & Dragons publishing from about 1982 through 1995 or so, but very little of it is rock-solid in my mind. This was my anti-D&D phase; I simply paid no attention at all to its content, to the books, to the people who played it, or to the business information.

At this point I see several "sub-phases," but would like lots of help with texts and commentary from those who were more involved with it.

First part: I saw that all the basic hardback-books were re-released in AD&D2 form, and that lines like Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance were established in tandem with fiction publishing.

Second part: I observed a truly amazing production-value push some time around 1990 - "kit" books for each character class, and what seemed like an endless line of magic-rules hardback books; spinoff boxed games with boards, plastic figures, and enclosed video cassetes to show you how to play; sourcebooks and paperback lines and whatnot; history-based supplements and sourcebooks (those green ones).

Third part (might be confused or overlapping with previous): alternate sub-lines of almost-separate games, including Al-Qadim, Planescape, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, et al. My cynical view is that many of these were essentially designed as their own RPGs originally, and were either idealistically offered to TSR (so they'd be "really" published) or frankly devoured through strong-arm tactics. I consider all of them to be "D&D" only in the most superficial sense possible.

Any help with the texts and products associated with the above, or any clarification with the timing I'm (dimly) perceiving is greatly appreciated.

Most generally, I'm interested in ownership. A great deal of talk is available concerning how Gygax was bought out by the people he'd borrowed money from in order to publish the original line of hardbacks, as well as how they were in turn bought out by corporate interests "on the east coast" (in an amusing terminological parallel to movie-lingo). Again, I am awash in anecdotes, various people's names, and plenty of opinions. Can anyone help me with hard information about any of this?

Best,
Ron

[Matt Snyder]

I can't help out much with ownership issues, but ....

Third part (might be confused or overlapping with previous): alternate sub-lines of almost-separate games, including Al-Qadim, Planescape, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, et al. My cynical view is that many of these were essentially designed as their own RPGs originally, and were either idealistically offered to TSR (so they'd be "really" published) or frankly devoured through strong-arm tactics. I consider all of them to be "D&D" only in the most superficial sense possible.

I think your cynicism is sorely misplaced here, Ron. This phase is D&D through and through.

I have only a vague memory of essays and/or editor's notes (that might have appeared in Dragon?) that indicated Dark Sun was created specifically FOR D&D (more specifically for AD&D second edition) and specifically to take the tropes of D&D and turn them on their head. It was a reactin to D&D using D&D. This was not done to alter a pre-existing game or rules-set. It was a D&D monstrosity all along (one I rather enjoyed at the time, and still appreciate for its color if nothing else).

I have heard similar tales regarding Birthright, which was someone's "homebrew" campaign (I can't recall who it was, but a recognizable "D&D" name -- Keith Baker perhaps?), rather than game system. If I remember right, all along it was a D&D beast, though a beast with some strange attributes (like the battle system it had).

In short, Ron, what I'm saying is this:

I do not believe, based 1) being very familiar with AD&D 2E products and actual play 2) on the scattered info I have and 3) my own interpretations, that these sub-games were ever anything but D&D from the onset. I believe that the creators of these products took one of two paths:

1) The "got" to publish their own homebrew campaign settings (stressing settings and campaigns, not systems -- they were playing D&D!) via employer TSR.

2) They created a funky new setting (boxed sets and all) as part of their work at TSR.

In either case, I believe quite strongly that these folks never really considered anything but D&D. This is not to say that they (they being "TSR" folks) never played, I dunno, Dark Sun Hero or something at home. But rather, that they never questioned the capacity of D&D to manage most anything they could muster together. This is evident in the incoherency of 2E products. The designers and creators simply assumed D&D could and should do it all. I don't think other rules systems ever entered the creative process at any point as primary efforts (naturally, other games were influencing designers, as has ever been and will ever be the case for all games).

As a slightly tangential note, I believe that the incoherency of D&D at this phase greatly contributed to many gamer's fascination, nay obsession, with color. Recognizing what color is and does was the single greatest "Aha!" moment I had when first visiting the Forge. It blew everything I assumed about gaming out the window, and rightly so. I was greatly influenced by "awesome settings" like Dark Sun, Planescape, and other D&D beasts. The vast majority of gamers I know are GREATLY influenced by these "awesome settings" (not just D&D -- Earthdawn is one of my groups favorite, though not mine). The look with longing and nostalgia at these settings, and further become frustrated with newer games that do not offer the robust detail and color of those.

I submit that this obsession with color (and setting) among gamers who weaned themselves on D&D 2E like I did is the single most common factor in people resisting "System Does Matter."

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Matt,

I submit that this obsession with color (and setting) among gamers who weaned themselves on D&D 2E like I did is the single most common factor in people resisting "System Does Matter."

No argument from me whatsoever.

Best,
Ron

[Matt Snyder]

Well, I guess I didn't figure you'd argue that point. I don't think we've talked about it much in that regard here on the forums, but it's an interesting phenomenon.

BUT, I've nearly derailed discussion. Sorry. On with the show. Can anybody offer Ron some more specific info. on D&D ownership and the like?

[Christopher Kubasik]

Hi Ron,

I was working at WEG when a lot of the "alternate sub-lines of almost-separate games" were coming out or in the pipeline.  In the publishing channels I listened to I heard absolutely nothing to suggest that these sub-lines were meant to be seperate games and got shoe-horned into AD&D.  Moreover, I'd heard specific events for some of these lines about their development -- and it was *always* as an AD&D supplment.

I'm somewhat boggled that this is even a question.  As you yourself have stated here, after culling lots of D&D/AD&D experience, there never was any D&D/AD&D "out in the world," but rather each group built its own games, worlds, and ways of playing.  Why should TSR be any different?  The people who staffed the company were, for the most part, people who built materials to publish exactly the way they had played the games -- which is how *we* played them.

TSR knew that their customers loved color and setting -- and lo! they provided it.  They knew their customers loved tweaks on the game rules to "fix" it or "make it better" or, at the least, bring it more in line with "reality" or the game world or what not.  And so they did that, too.  People could then take these rules tweaks, lift them out of the published settings, and dabble them into their own home-brews.

In short, the products your asking about in point three *are* homebrews -- born from the core D&D/AD&D mentality -- done up with really great color and sometimes amazing production values.  (My heart still pitter-patters when I think of how pretty Al-Qadim was.)

Did they work?  Not always.  I really, really wanted Al-Qadim to work.  (I own the 16 volumen Burton adaptation of the Arabian Nights, for crying out loud.)  But the system does matter.  At the time, no one really considered that.  But there was nothing cynical about it.  Rather, it was a "I-bet-they'll-love-this-attached-the-rules-because-I-do!" naivte.

Take care,
Christopher

[Valamir]

I have no hard info to share, but I can confirm with more anecdotal evidence, Matt your sense of the subsettings.

I never saw, felt, heard or otherwise got the impression that those settings were any less D&D than Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, or Krynn.

What might be interesting is a peek at the game time line and see if those settings were really an attempt to D&D-ize other popular genres (like d20 does today).

Spelljammer is a sort of fantasy Space 1889
Planescape is a sort of fantasy Rifts
Dark Sun is a sort of fantasy post apocalypse, which was a popular genre at the time.

I don't know which games came first though.

[Ron Edwards]

Sigh ... you know, I hate it when a tossed-off side point or speculation becomes the topic of a thread, and especially when it's all my fault.

I fully concede the point about the authoring-origins of the game lines including Al-Qadim, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, et al.

I fully acknowledge that the emphasis so far in the discussion is my fault alone.

I respectfully beg that further points help us all out with the history in question that I've tentatively described and asked about in the other paragraphs and sentences in my initial post.

Best,
Ron

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Hullo, Ron.

I recomend acquiring a copy of Heroic Worlds by Lawrence Schick when it comes to checking year published dates. AFAIK they are accurate.

First part: I saw that all the basic hardback-books were re-released in AD&D2 form, and that lines like Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance were established in tandem with fiction publishing.

2nd ed AD&D is listed as being released 1989. The Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance Adventures boxed sets are listed as being realsed 1987. I recall an ad in a comic book for Forgotten Realms identifying it as a 1st ed AD&D product, most likely because 2nd ed was not out yet ;-)

I was not very deep into the subculture, either, but I am give to believe that Dragonlance started as a series of novels that was developed into a game world and that the first couple modules were heavily railroaded methods of "playing" the novels, force to play the characters from the book and follow the plot of the novel. This is admitted hearsay. Anyone who would know care to comment?

Second part: I observed a truly amazing production-value push some time around 1990 - "kit" books for each character class, and what seemed like an endless line of magic-rules hardback books; spinoff boxed games with boards, plastic figures, and enclosed video cassetes to show you how to play; sourcebooks and paperback lines and whatnot; history-based supplements and sourcebooks (those green ones).

A serious glut of product, to be sure. Introductory boxed sets, boxed sets with audio CDs (FirstQuest) Boxed sets with rather ugly plastic miniatures, seveal attempts in there to try to make a game as charmingly elegant as HeroQuest from GW/MB. Most were overdone or just didn't work because the components were very ugly, or it was a thinly veiled lead-in to AD&D. If you don't believe me, read the TSR production of Dragonquest sometime. The introduction makes direct comparasons to AD&D. The idea was, I assume, to put lots of stuff out there so people would buy it. They did once it showed up in Kay Bee Toys marked down to $3. At least I did for a couple items, anyway. I got the Dungeon and DragonStrike board games this way. (DragonStrike was one of the attempt to make a HeroQuest-like game that included a VHS tape. If you wish further comment on this game, feel free to ask)

Most generally, I'm interested in ownership. A great deal of talk is available concerning how Gygax was bought out by the people he'd borrowed money from in order to publish the original line of hardbacks, as well as how they were in turn bought out by corporate interests "on the east coast" (in an amusing terminological parallel to movie-lingo). Again, I am awash in anecdotes, various people's names, and plenty of opinions. Can anyone help me with hard information about any of this?

The only hard info I have is in Heroic Worlds, the Fantasy Role-Playing Gamer's Bible, and The Complete Guid to Role-Playing Games. I'll leave you to seek these sources if you have not already. Ask if you want me to find it.

[Valamir]

I was not very deep into the subculture, either, but I am give to believe that Dragonlance started as a series of novels that was developed into a game world and that the first couple modules were heavily railroaded methods of "playing" the novels, force to play the characters from the book and follow the plot of the novel. This is admitted hearsay. Anyone who would know care to comment?

These were some of my favorite novels as a kid.  I eagerly reread them when the new annotated edition came out.  Man did they SUCK.  What horrible writers Weiss and Hickman were (are?).  Another example, along with Battlestar Gallactica of favorite things best left in the nostalgia bin.

At any rate the Annotated version contained quite a detailed history of Krynn and its relation to D&D, which I could share if this info is desired  From memory, IIRC the situation was almost exactly the opposite, with. the first (and most painfully written book) being essentially inspired by module play.  Not exactly an actual game transcript, but definitely written as if it could have been...you could almost insert the game rules as foot notes into the text in places.

[efindel]

This is from a combination of memory and info on web sites.  Commentary is my thoughts.  I have Heroic Worlds at home, but don't have it handy to check dates.

1980:  "Pink Box" Basic D&D released, and "Blue Box" Expert D&D.  Companion D&D set promised, with Expert set saying some of the stuff it'll have.  Is not produced for this version of D&D.

early 80s:  first edition AD&D books re-released, with new cover art.  Insides are unchanged

1983:  "Red Box" Basic D&D released, and a new (still blue) version of Expert.  There's a major emphasis in the "red box" on making it easy to learn to play -- starts with a solo adventure which teaches the rules, then the DM's book (this version has two booklets included)  has a semi-programmed adventure for the first-time DM to use, and a map and suggestions for stocking for further adventures.

1984:  D&D Companion set is released, but it doesn't match the promises made back in 1980.  (I.e., it has different stuff in it)

1985:  D&D Master's set released.  Unearthed Arcana released for AD&D.

1986:  D&D Immortals set released.

During this same period, a large number of D&D modules and campaign setting info is released.  D&D gets certain things (multiple levels of weapon specialization and a rudimentary skill system being the big ones) which AD&D would later get.

1989:  second edition AD&D released.  PH, DMG, and MM, all in the space of four or five months.

1991:  "black box" Basic D&D set released, again with an emphasis on teaching new players the game.  This set was supposedly designed by education professionals.  It has a set of cardstock sheets which teach the game a step at a time, with a series of bits of rules, each with a programmed adventure showing the rules in action.  Going through all the sheets is supposed to take about a month, and it leads the newbie through becoming a DM as well.

The "D&D Rules Cyclopedia" is released, collecting all the rules from Basic-Master's D&D into one place, with some editing.

1992:  The "Wrath of the Immortals" boxed set for D&D is released, which both updates the D&D setting of Mystara, and gives an updated set of rules for Immortal characters, replacing the previous Immortals set.

1994:  "The Classic Dungeons & Dragons" boxed set is released -- the last version of "Basic D&D".  This one gives rules for levels 1-5, where previous versions only covered 1-3.

mid-90s:  AD&D "2.5" is released -- updates to the core books with new cover, layout, and artwork, plus expansion books -- "Spells & Magic" and two others whose names I don't remember.

And that's all that I remember well... for me, the most interesting part is the use of the D&D line as sort of a "testing ground" for ideas that later showed up in AD&D.

--Travis

[Jeff Klein]

Longtine reader, first-time poster.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=3AC04047.5B9C88ED%40earthlink.net">Jeff Grubb would probably be the person to talk to, he's been pretty open about TSR publishing history on USENET.  Gygax has some of his view of the ownership situation in http://www.tongue.fsnet.co.uk/archives.htm">OD&DITIES 9, though light on Williams and the Dille Trust, which is the timeframe you're looking for.  It wouldn't hurt to shoot an e-mail to Ryan Dancey and see what he can tell you on or off the record, oh, Jim Ward too.

[Gordon C. Landis]

One phenomena I've heard associated with this period in TSR history (via ancedote and third-hand "he heard D&D illuminary X say" gossip) is that RPG product was mostly seen as a way to help generate novel sales.  So you hear about the corp execs who didn't care about the product, they just needed the justification for a new novel series, and the game designers who did their best to do a good job for the players not-just-the-readers, and etc.  The corp execs alternatively "tossing a bone" to the players and "soaking 'em for a few more bucks," even though the only real money was in the novel business.

One financial analysis of TSR I've heard says that this "novel over game product" strategy eventually backfired, when they had a glut of mediocre novels on the shelves and the book industry took a turn, stopped generating all that much cash, and in fact started returning large volumes of books for the contracted refund.  Leading to their dire financial straights and the WotC purchase.

But I also was not active at this time, and this is mostly heresay.  I've got a message out to a few folks who know more (including the winner of the D&D "Triviathlon" they ran just before the WotC purchase) - maybe that'll scare up some details.

Gordon

[Caldis]

Well I can help a little bit, I played a lot of AD&D back in the 80's.  
Of course thats awhile ago and my memory isnt what it used to be.

My first exposure to D&D and gaming in general came in about 1979 when an older friend ran a game of AD&D 1st edition through the "Against the Giants Module" using pregenerated characters.  We fell in love with role playing and living in the sticks we were lucky if we found even the D&D books let alone any other rpg's.  

The books that were coming out from TSR at the time were limited to the main books, PHB, DMG, MM, and lots of modules.  I think they may have run into the problem that they couldnt make a lot of money off of the modules and so their products began to grow in scale.  More core books came out like the "Fiend Folio", "Monster Manual 2", "Unearthed Arcana", "Wilderness Survival Guide", and the "Dungeoneers survival guide".  These were all hardcover books of the same size as the original Players Handbook.  They also put out a boxed set sourcebook for the "World of Greyhawk" their first published campaign setting.

They had not given up  on modules at this time, still producing many and tending to hook them together into series.  I believe it was in 1984 or maybe 85 that they moved towards introducing Novel lines connected with their modules, most notably the "Ravenloft" module came out as well as the "Dragonlance" line of novels and modules.

They also began to re-release some of their older module series as large paperback editions like "Queen of the Demonweb pits", "Against the Slave lords", "Temple of Elemental Evil".  As well they put out the "Lankhmar" sourcebook.  

In 1987 they released the "Forgotten Realms" campaign setting as a boxed set.  As I remember it that was one of the last products of the first edition of AD&D, though there may have been a "Manual of the planes" hardbound book that came out at this time as well.  

The "sub phases" you mentioned really began in 1989 with the release of the 2nd edition of AD&D.  New Players handbook, new DMG, and the new monstrous compendium which came out as a 3 ring binder and allowed you to add new sheets of monsters from different supplements.

This is where the real proliferation of product began and it was mostly evolution of existing ideas rather than new schemes.   You mentioned the 'kit' books  "The complete X handbook", which gave aditional information on classes and races and added many elements to the basic system.  The green books you mentioned were "The X campaign sourcebook" detailing historical settings for DM's to run campaigns in.

The Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance settings had already existed for several years at this point but the success of the original Dragonlance novels was followed up with a glut of imitators in every setting.

The Forgotten Realms campaign setting was updated for the second edition and they began producing box sets that detailed specific areas within the realms and that were also adventure modules in many cases.   "City of Splendours" came out which detailed Waterdeep and there was a related dungeon "Undermountain" about an underground city that was nearby.  

The forgotten realms novels that came out at this time lead to the increasing popularity of the Drow, evil dark elves.  Several supplements came out detailing there underground habitat most notably, "Menzoberranzen".

Ravenloft, which was a 1st edition module, became very popular about the same time as Vampire: The masquerade was outside D&D circles.  It was rereleased as a campaign setting and a series of novels.

All of these products, as well as most of the settings you mentioned, seemed to come out very quickly in the early 90's.  The different settings really seemed to come about as a way to show that D&D could do absolutely everything in RPG's.  Only one piece of counter evidence exists in that Dragonlance was eventually rereleased with it's own new system the SAGA system in 1997(?)

As to ownership I know fairly little.  I believe Gygax was pretty much pushed out of the picture by the mid 80's and the new owners of TSR held on until the late 90's when Wizards of the Coast bought them out.

I hope this is of some help to you.

[talysman]

I dunno if this will help or not, but... there were a number of articles in Dragon magazine during the development stages of D&D2e and the other products mention on this thread. I do have the Dragon CD set and can look up/copy&paste specific data, but I'm a little confused about what exactly Ron is looking for, perhaps because of all the subthreads going on. are we just trying to clarify when products were announced, then published? and how many subgames TSR was involved with during the 2e phase?

the main thing I remember was a questionaire in Dragon asking gamers what changes they would like to see in AD&D, followed by an article explaining what gamers asked for and why TSR wasn't going to do that. (people asked to ditch the spell memorization system, for example.)

[jrs]

In regards to the ownership question.  I've come across the following online sources.  I'm not certain if this is what you want; I hope it helps.

Julie


REC.GAMES.FRP.DND FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
HTML Version 5.3
Compiled by Joel Hahn
Last revised 05/09/03
http://users.rcn.com/aardy/faq/rgfdfaq.html">http://users.rcn.com/aardy/faq/rgfdfaq.html
In particular, Part 3, TSR/WotC

"A History of Role-Playing" as published in, Places to Go, People to Be
Parts 1-4 by Astinus
Parts 5-8 by Steven Darlington
URL for part 1:  
http://ptgptb.org/0001/history1.html">http://ptgptb.org/0001/history1.html

Gygax FAQ
no longer live, cached at the Internet Archive:
http://web.archive.org/web/20011006152442/http://www.gygax.com/gygaxfaq.html">http://web.archive.org/web/20011006152442/http://www.gygax.com/gygaxfaq.html