The image I most associate with D&D |
I wanted to start out today with something that is often overlooked, the Foreword and the Preface. Most people want to quickly get to “the good stuff” and never actually read the beginning parts of this book, or any book for that matter. I believe these opening statements give us, the readers, and an insight into the founders of the hobby and expose us to their intentions with the creation of the game. This lays a groundwork for not just D&D, but the RPG industry as a whole due to the influence D&D held, and still holds to this day.
The Foreword
This is the only bit of content really in the book that is not written by Gary Gygax (unless you include the comics). The Foreward was written by then TSR Editor Mike Carr of In Search of the Unknown fame. Beyond other projects, Carr was the editor of AD&D’s core three books at the time the Player’s Handbook, Dungeon Master’s Guide, and Monster’s Manual. This gives him a wonderful insight into the thought process around the entire D&D world, at that time. He begins his letter to the player’s with an important question, “Is Dungeon Mastering an art or a science?” A question we can still ask ourselves today.
The second part of Carr’s quote is the concept of labor. Being a DM is work, and they are certainly the busiest person at the session. Any labor, whether for work or for love, has value. That value needs to be respected because the DM’s opportunity cost is generally larger than anyone else at the table. As a player be respectful of the DM’s time, effort, and energy. Allow basic etiquette to apply, pay attention to the game, act in the best interest of the game as a whole, don’t argue with the DM at the table, etc.
This beginning section is a great section and at only five short paragraphs it has a lot crammed in for DMs and players alike. Carr discusses the boons and busts of being a DM that can resonate with anyone that has stepped behind the screen regardless of edition or even RPG. I think I will leave this section with a quote from the text, “Dungeon Mastering itself is no easy undertaking, to be sure. But Dungeon Mastering well is doubly difficult.”
The Preface
This was a letter from Gary Gygax to his fellow campaign referees (Dungeon Masters) about the book they just purchased. Beyond that, it really discusses some of what he saw as the job of a “referee” in running a campaign. He stresses that this books is solely for the Dungeon Masters and is not for the players. He goes so far as to state that players should not own this book, and those that do are “less than worthy of an honorable death.” This seems like such a foreign concept these days as it is eliminating a portion of the market. I think a significant portion of the people who play D&D own the core, three books of the PHB, DMG, and MM. You are just throwing sales out the window, for the sake of keeping the core game mechanics a secret. Remember at this point the DMG, not the PHB, has most of the rules for play. Combat is not covered in the PBH, because that was not for players to know.
Art from the DMG. |
I am not sure how tongue in cheek the statement above is, but it seems serious in the passage. He also suggests charging PCs who own the DMG, more money from sages for information. If meta-knowledge is used from the DMG, it is suggested that the player should lose several magic items and apparently that is letting them off easy. One thing this shows us is the value knowledge had in older (A)D&D. My players have come to realize this more recently. They would much rather get a useful piece of intel then a magic item, because knowledge often keeps you alive. This could have disastrous consequences for the tournament scene, which he mentions as a reason for the standardization of the rules.
Gary says that this work is “written as one Dungeon Master equal to another.” The DM is the “creator and ultimate authority in your respective game”. Regardless of that power, this book was about taking the rules and trying to create a “degree of uniformity” so that players could travel from one game to another and not, in essence, be playing a different game. He admits to the fact that no two games will be 100% the same, but hopefully the core will remain the same. Races will be the same, spells will work more or less the same way, magic items might vary, but will have a common resonance. Thus in some ways this book is about putting some limitations on the game and set up a group of boundaries. These boundaries are important, because at some point you run the risk of drifting out of what is D&D. He warns players, “Similarly, you must avoid the tendency to drift into areas foreign to the games as a whole. Such campaigns become so strange as to be no longer “AD&D”. They are isolated and will usually wither.” The trick seems to be to create something new and unique to yourself, while maintaining the viability of the rules i.e. the systems and “laws”.
Other bits of advice from the letter involve getting the most out of being a referee. He discusses how you will spend hours making, creating, and running your game. The best reward a DM can hope for is that people (players) use what you created. Isn’t that what we all want? So that are effort wasn’t for nothing? We just want someone to play with our toy. I think this is a great insight, and he discusses some pitfalls. He mentions how player, in general, want their characters to succeed. There is nothing wrong with that, but if left to their own devices they will often want to succeed quickly and with as little struggle as possible. Players with a strong personality can manipulate a DM into ideas that might be good for them and their PC, but bad for the group or game world in general. Players that do not have as strong a personality will drift from the game as they will want something more egalitarian and possibly challenging. The opposite is a problem too. Games that have too high a difficulty might feel unfair, or that the DM is just out to “get” the players. This can lead to resentment and players ditching the game in order to avoid a weekly beat down.
This article is wonderful and shows players of any edition the thoughts that went behind some of the earliest years of the game. The book was released in 1979, but he does mention in this letter he had been working on it for at least 2 years. So the construction of this mammoth tome was started about 3 years after the hobby was created. We see some of the intentions of the creators in that the DM is the ultimate authority of his game, the rules need to be grounded, but flexible, and that knowledge should be a commodity in D&D games.
I plan on continuing this series and delving more into the AD&D Dungeon Master’s Guide to see what it can teach us about today’s gaming. If you would like to see more, please comment here or on social media to let me know. Overall this has been one of my favorite articles to write as I have always had an affinity for this book, though 1st Edition AD&D is the edition I have played the least. I think all editions can benefit from this book, and I plan to show it.
If you are interested in getting a copy of the AD&D 1st Edition Dungeon Master's Guide you can get a PDF or Print on Demand HERE.
If you are interested in an original copy try HERE.
Like my work? Follow me on Facebook here. I recently added a Donations Button for people who want to support the blog with a one-time donation. For those not satisfied with a one-time donation, please consider joining my Patreon. The button is above too.
Well said, o good and faithful delver.
ReplyDeleteThank you. I plan to delve more.
DeleteGreat post! I'm pretty sure Gary was being direct with his comments about not letting player's have a DMG. I've had hundreds of players at my table over the years and I can think of only maybe 4-6 people that had any books at all. I normally dissuade them from getting books. This is part of the entire problem of the sales side of the hobby. It's a hobby, best played with limited knowledge. WotC changed the scene by making it player focused and totally ruined the hobby with their d20 nonsense.
ReplyDeleteI'm ranting. Thanks Ryan!
No problem, though I think the problem was around before WotC. Look at 2e, it was very player focused.
DeleteAnything published after TSR is basically DINO (D&D in Name Only) anyhow. Thank God for the OSR movement.
DeleteI don't necessarily agree with that, still D&D to me, just a different flavor.
DeleteI don't have my orig. copy but I have a PDF of it and I raid it for ideas all the time. Even all the various materials for DMs in 2e can't compare with that original source. I like to flavor my 2e work with herbs and spices from 1e and I think the stew is good.
ReplyDeleteTake the best bits from each.
Delete