Dungeons & Dragons — Arneson and Gygax: the history of D&D¶
1. Purpose of the research¶
In 1974, the first edition of Dungeons & Dragons appeared, credited to Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson.
Often, its birth is summarized as the collaboration between two designers.
Reality was more complex.
When Arneson and Gygax began to work together, neither started from scratch.
Both came from American wargaming, but they had traveled different paths and were connected with communities that had been experimenting with rules, campaigns, adjudication, fantasy, and simulation for years.
Behind Dave Arneson were:
- the Twin Cities wargamers community;
- David Wesley;
- the Braunstein experiments;
- Blackmoor;
- years of play, adaptation, and emergent rules.
Behind Gary Gygax were:
- organized wargaming;
- the International Federation of Wargamers;
- the Castle & Crusade Society;
- Jeff Perren;
- Chainmail;
- experience writing, editing, and publishing rules.
Therefore, this document does not intend to answer:
Who invented Dungeons & Dragons?
The archaeological question is more interesting:
What happened when these two trajectories converged and had to become a game that could exist outside the tables of its creators?
2. Two paths toward Dungeons & Dragons¶
Our provisional genealogy can be represented thus:
WARGAMING
│
┌─────────────┴─────────────┐
│ │
▼ ▼
TWIN CITIES LAKE GENEVA
│ │
▼ ▼
DAVID WESLEY JEFF PERREN
│ │
▼ ▼
BRAUNSTEIN PERREN + GYGAX
(1969) │
│ ▼
▼ CHAINMAIL
TWIN CITIES SCHOOL 1971
│ │
▼ │
DAVE ARNESON │
│ │
▼ │
BLACKMOOR │
1971 │
│ │
└────────────┐ ┌────────────┘
│ │
▼ ▼
ARNESON + GYGAX
│
▼
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
1974
│
▼
RPG EXPANSION
This tree should be understood as an explanatory model, not as a genealogy of exclusively linear influence.
Twin Cities and Lake Geneva were not isolated worlds.
American wargaming communities were connected through associations, conventions, fanzines, correspondence, and shared campaigns.
The real history resembles more a network.
3. The Twin Cities branch¶
The first branch has been studied in greater detail in:
- The Twin Cities School — The lab before D&D
- Blackmoor
Its immediate starting point was the work of David Wesley.
3.1 Braunstein¶
In 1969, Wesley organized an experimental game that was later known as Braunstein.
Instead of limiting all participants to controlling military forces, he assigned different players individual characters with their own information, interests, and objectives.
Players began to perform actions not anticipated by the rules.
The referee resolved those actions using rules when possible and through adjudication when not.
The result introduced a fundamental difference from a closed game:
ACTIONS THAT THE PLAYER
Can attempt
>
ACTIONS DESCRIBED
BY THE RULESET
The referee covered that difference.
4. Arneson and Blackmoor¶
Dave Arneson participated in this experimental environment.
In 1971 he began to develop his own game, initially described in contemporary documentation as a "medieval Braunstein".
That experiment would become Blackmoor.
Blackmoor progressively combined elements like:
- individual characters;
- persistent world;
- continuity between sessions;
- exploration;
- dungeon;
- combat;
- treasures;
- progression;
- adventures;
- factions;
- referee;
- rules modified and added during play.
The fundamental change relative to Braunstein can be summarized as:
BRAUNSTEIN
situation
↓
individual character
↓
objective
↓
resolution
versus:
BLACKMOOR
individual character
↓
adventure
↓
survives
↓
maintains state
↓
progresses
↓
returns
↓
new adventure
↓
same world
The situation had become a campaign.
5. Blackmoor demonstrates that the new game works¶
The importance of Blackmoor does not necessarily lie in each of its elements being invented there.
Its importance lies in that many of them worked together in a continued way.
Players returned.
Characters returned.
The world kept existing.
Other participants also began to reproduce and transform the experience.
David Megarry would later develop Dungeon!.
Greg Svenson designed Tonisborg.
The format began to escape from Arneson's table.
Something transmittable had appeared.
But still, an important problem remained.
Much of Blackmoor depended on:
Dave Arneson knew how Blackmoor worked.
Converting that experience into a commercial product required a different kind of work.
6. The Lake Geneva branch¶
The other great branch of our genealogy leads to Lake Geneva, Wisconsin.
There we find Gary Gygax, a figure deeply embedded in American wargaming.
Gygax actively participated in:
- clubs;
- associations;
- conventions;
- correspondence;
- fanzines;
- rules design;
- publication of material.
His trajectory before D&D is important because it represents a different experience from Arneson's.
Gygax had considerable practice in turning game ideas into rule texts.
7. Jeff Perren and Chainmail¶
The story of Chainmail doesn't begin solely with Gygax.
Jeff Perren had developed rules to represent medieval combats with miniatures.
Gygax worked on those rules, expanded them, and finally they were commercially published in 1971 as:
Chainmail — Rules for Medieval Miniatures
credited to:
Gary Gygax & Jeff Perren.
The ruleset included medieval combat, movement, weapons, armor, morale, and various resolution procedures.
But for our genealogy, what's especially important is its:
Fantasy Supplement
that introduced fantasy elements like:
- Heroes;
- Super-Heroes;
- Wizards;
- monsters;
- dragons;
- magic;
- fantastic creatures;
- magic weapons;
- Fireball;
- Lightning Bolt;
- Law and Chaos.
Chainmail was not an RPG.
But it was formalizing through rules a fantasy vocabulary that would later be familiar to D&D.
8. Two different problems¶
We can provisionally simplify the two branches thus:
Blackmoor
tried to answer:
What happens when a person can try to do practically anything within a persistent world?
Its main tool was:
the referee.
Chainmail
tried to answer:
How can we consistently resolve situations of medieval and fantasy combat?
Its main tool was:
written procedure.
We can represent it:
BLACKMOOR
intención
↓
referee
↓
interpretation
↓
result
versus:
CHAINMAIL
situation
↓
rule
↓
table / dice
↓
result
This opposition is useful.
But it should not become a caricature.
Arneson also designed rules.
Gygax also designed worlds, situations, and game ideas.
The difference describes trends and backgrounds, not two incompatible personalities.
9. Arneson and Gygax were already connected¶
The two branches didn't have to wait for D&D to come into contact.
Arneson belonged to the Castle & Crusade Society, organization founded by Gary Gygax and Robert Kuntz.
Enthusiasts exchanged:
- letters;
- fanzines;
- rules;
- maps;
- campaigns;
- ideas.
Arneson and Gygax maintained correspondence before D&D existed.
The wargaming community provided the infrastructure that allowed the encounter.
10. Blackmoor arrives at Lake Geneva¶
One of the fundamental events of our genealogy occurred when Arneson showed Blackmoor to Gygax.
The exact chronology of some early encounters and demonstrations has been reconstructed in different ways by later sources, so it's wise to be cautious about overly precise dates.
What is clear enough is:
Gygax directly got to know the type of game Arneson was developing in Blackmoor.
That was different from a conventional miniature battle.
There were:
- characters;
- exploration;
- dungeon;
- progression;
- adventures;
- campaign;
- referee.
Gygax recognized that something with enormous potential existed there.
11. The convergence¶
From then on, a collaboration process began.
Arneson and Gygax exchanged:
- rules;
- notes;
- ideas;
- manuscripts;
- comments;
- playtest results.
Development was carried out through correspondence and distant conversations, accompanied by playtesting in different groups.
Between 1973 and 1974, both collaborated on the work that would end up becoming Dungeons & Dragons.
Here our genealogy stops having two independent branches.
BLACKMOOR CHAINMAIL
│ │
│ │
▼ ▼
ARNESON GYGAX
│ │
└───────────┬────────────┘
│
▼
COLLABORATION
│
rules + playtests
writing + revision
│
▼
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
12. It was not simply Blackmoor + Chainmail¶
The formula:
Blackmoor + Chainmail = D&D
is attractive.
But it's too simple.
D&D incorporated ideas from numerous places:
- wargaming;
- Braunstein;
- Blackmoor;
- Chainmail;
- fantasy literature;
- previous campaigns;
- experiments by other players;
- new rules developed specifically during the process.
Moreover, some procedures used in Blackmoor were replaced.
Other Chainmail concepts disappeared or were deeply transformed.
Therefore:
BLACKMOOR + CHAINMAIL
≠
FULL D&D
Both are fundamental layers, not exclusive ingredients.
13. The problem they faced¶
Blackmoor had demonstrated that the experience worked.
But there was an enormous difference between:
playing Blackmoor with Dave Arneson
and:
buying a rulebook and trying to create your own Blackmoor.
The new product had to transfer knowledge.
That required answering questions like:
- what is a character?
- what attributes does it have?
- how does it improve?
- how does it fight?
- how does armor work?
- what can a wizard do?
- how is a monster represented?
- how is a dungeon explored?
- what does the referee do?
- how is a campaign created?
- how is uncertainty resolved?
The challenge was not only designing a game.
It was describing a new way of playing.
14. Dungeons & Dragons appears¶
In January 1974 was published:
Dungeons & Dragons: Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures
The subtitle is archaeologically revealing.
D&D was still described using the vocabulary of the world it came from:
Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns
The modern term role-playing game was not yet the established commercial category it would later become.
The new genre was appearing before there was fully consolidated vocabulary to describe it.
15. Three small volumes¶
The first edition appeared in a box containing three small books:
- Men & Magic
- Monsters & Treasure
- The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures
The division is fascinating because it almost allows observing the architecture of the new game.
MEN & MAGIC
characters + abilities + magic
MONSTERS & TREASURE
content + risk + reward
UNDERWORLD & WILDERNESS
space + exploration + campaign
Character.
World.
Procedures.
The RPG was beginning to become a document.
16. What D&D formalized¶
OD&D provided structures for elements like:
- characters;
- classes;
- levels;
- experience;
- attributes;
- combat;
- armor;
- magic;
- spells;
- monsters;
- treasures;
- movement;
- exploration;
- dungeon;
- wilderness;
- campaigns.
An experience that previously could depend enormously on the referee's implicit knowledge began to have a shared vocabulary.
Now groups separated by geography could talk about:
- Fighter.
- Magic-User.
- Level.
- Armor Class.
- Hit Points.
- Experience Points.
The new game was beginning to be portable.
17. But D&D still needed the referee¶
Here we find a fundamental paradox.
D&D formalized the experience enormously.
But it did not attempt to eliminate the referee.
On the contrary.
Much of the game continued to depend on the referee's ability to:
- interpret situations;
- build the world;
- prepare maps;
- control monsters;
- manage information;
- decide consequences;
- resolve unanticipated actions.
The model continued being:
PLAYER
│
│ declares intention
▼
REFEREE
│
├── consult rules
├── interpret
├── adjudicate
└── update world
│
▼
RESULT
Two centuries after Kriegsspiel, the umpire figure was still alive.
It had simply changed scenery.
18. The Dungeon Master as a human machine¶
From the future perspective of the CRPG, we can describe the referee in a deliberately mechanical way.
It receives:
INPUT
"Open the door." "I attack the orc." "I search for a trap." "I cast Fireball."
It queries:
STATE
- map
- characters
- enemies
- inventory
- rules
- hidden information
It executes:
PROCEDURES
- movement
- rolls
- combat
- detection
- magic
- reaction
It produces:
OUTPUT
"You find..." "You fail..." "The orc..." "The door..."
That is to say:
INPUT
↓
STATE + RULES
↓
REFEREE
↓
RESULT
↓
NEW STATE
This observation will be fundamental later.
Because the computer will try to occupy precisely that space.
19. TSR¶
Publishing a new game required money, printing, and distribution.
Gary Gygax and Don Kaye founded Tactical Studies Rules (TSR) to publish D&D.
The first run was small.
But the game began to spread rapidly within the hobby.
Here another important transformation occurs:
LOCAL EXPERIMENT
↓
RULESET
↓
PRODUCT
↓
DISTRIBUTION
↓
NEW GROUPS
↓
NEW CAMPAIGNS
Knowledge no longer needed to be transmitted only through personal contact.
It could travel inside a box.
20. The game escapes its creators¶
This might be one of the most important moments of our genealogy.
Blackmoor depended enormously on Arneson.
Gygax's campaigns depended on Gygax.
But D&D could produce:
PERSON WHO
NEVER MET
ARNEson OR GYGAX
↓
BUY D&D
↓
INTERPRETS RULES
↓
CREATES DUNGEON
↓
RUNS CAMPAIGN
↓
OTHER PLAYERS
CREATE CHARACTERS
The new way of playing had become reproducible at a distance.
That is a gigantic historical difference.
21. An incomplete rulebook¶
However, the 1974 OD&D was not a particularly pedagogical modern manual.
Its text assumed some wargaming knowledge and left many procedures open to interpretation.
It even referred to Chainmail as an option for certain combat procedures, although it also included what was called the Alternative Combat System, based on the d20.
This reveals something important.
D&D was still between two worlds:
WARGAME
│
│
▼
OD&D 1974
│
│
▼
RPG AS
AUTONOMOUS GENRE
The product existed.
But its language was still learning how to explain what it was.
22. Two styles still present in the game¶
The collaboration between Arneson and Gygax did not eliminate the two trends we have observed.
The RPG continued to contain simultaneously:
Adjudication
The player tries something unexpected and the referee decides how to resolve it.
System
The player performs an anticipated action and the rulebook provides a procedure.
Therefore:
RPG
│
┌───────┴───────┐
│ │
▼ ▼
ADJUDICATION RULES
│ │
▼ ▼
FLEXIBILITY CONSISTENCY
The tension between both extremes will not disappear.
In fact, it will continue to accompany RPG design for decades.
23. Arneson enters TSR¶
After the initial success of D&D, Dave Arneson ended up working for TSR in 1976.
His tenure at the company was brief.
Later sources describe:
- methodological differences;
- organizational problems;
- personal disagreements;
- different expectations;
- conflicts over production and work.
Some testimonies have emphasized Arneson's difficulties adapting to editorial deadlines.
Other participants from that time offer a more complex image of TSR's internal culture.
CAUTION
We should not reduce his departure to: "Arneson didn't meet deadlines and TSR fired him."
The available evidence points to a much more complex relationship.
The matter deserves to be studied through specific documentation if we want to reconstruct it with greater precision in the future.
24. The transformation of TSR¶
TSR was leaving behind a small operation created to publish a strange game.
D&D was growing.
Appeared:
- supplements;
- new rules;
- products;
- employees;
- production needs;
- contracts;
- intellectual property;
- editorial calendars.
The ecosystem had changed.
In Twin Cities, a rule could be modified during the next session.
In a publishing house:
IDEA
↓
MANUSCRIPT
↓
REVIEW
↓
LAYOUT
↓
PRINTING
↓
DISTRIBUTION
needed to become a finished product.
The experimental culture of the hobby was coming into contact with the demands of an industry.
25. Gygax and written production¶
In this transition, one characteristic of Gary Gygax was especially important:
his enormous written production.
Before and after D&D, he produced:
- articles;
- rules;
- supplements;
- scenarios;
- correspondence;
- editorial material.
This capability was especially suitable for a company whose raw material consisted precisely of turning game ideas into publishable documents.
This does not make Gygax simply:
"the one who wrote Arneson's ideas."
His participation in design was substantial.
But it helps explain why his role grew as D&D became an editorial line.
26. Advanced Dungeons & Dragons¶
During the second half of the 1970s, a new branch appeared:
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.
The main books were published under Gary Gygax's authorship.
AD&D represented, among other things, a much greater systematization of the game.
But it also opened a fundamental contractual problem.
Was AD&D:
a new and independent game?
Or was it:
an evolution or derivation of Dungeons & Dragons?
The answer had economic consequences.
Dave Arneson had contractual rights related to D&D.
If AD&D belonged to that same contractual family, there could be royalties to claim.
27. The conflict¶
At the end of the 1970s, Arneson initiated legal actions related to D&D and AD&D.
The conflict mainly affected:
- royalties;
- contracts;
- authorship;
- derivative nature of certain products;
- recognition.
Therefore, it's incorrect to summarize it only as:
"Arneson sued to get his name on it."
The conflict was also economic and contractual.
And it was closely related to a fundamental question:
Whose was the work that had been born from that collaboration?
28. Do not turn the dispute into mythology¶
Decades of discussion have produced two recurring caricatures.
Mythology A
Arneson invented everything and Gygax took it.
Mythology B
Arneson had some ideas, but Gygax really created D&D because he was able to write it down.
Both explanations are too simple.
The documentation we have studied shows a much more interesting process.
Arneson contributed a decisive experience developed around Blackmoor.
Gygax contributed considerable experience as a designer, writer, and hobby organizer.
Both worked together on D&D.
And both were using ideas developed within much older communities.
History doesn't need a single hero.
29. Authorship as an archaeological problem¶
The question:
"Who invented D&D?"
might be poorly formulated.
We can replace it with several better questions:
- Who developed certain practices?
- Where are they first documented?
- Who turned them into rules?
- Who integrated them?
- Who published them?
- Who made others able to reproduce them?
Then a much richer chain appears:
COMMUNITY
↓
EXPERIMENT
↓
PRACTICE
↓
RULE
↓
DOCUMENTATION
↓
PRODUCT
↓
DIFFUSION
D&D is the result of that entire process.
30. The work of Arneson and Gygax¶
So, what did they do together?
Our provisional conclusion would be:
Arneson and Gygax managed to turn a series of experimental practices from wargaming, campaigns, adjudication, and fantasy into a product that allowed other groups to create their own worlds, characters, and adventures.
Arneson does not contribute simply "imagination."
Gygax does not contribute simply "the rules."
Both design.
Both adapt.
Both come from previous communities.
But their convergent trajectories help explain why D&D achieved what Blackmoor and Chainmail separately had not:
making a new way of playing reproducible.
31. What Dungeons & Dragons left behind¶
From the perspective of RPG Archaeology, the importance of D&D does not lie only in having created an industry.
D&D consolidated a set of extraordinarily fertile abstractions:
CHARACTER
CLASS
LEVEL
EXPERIENCE
HIT POINTS
ARMOR CLASS
SPELL
MONSTER
TREASURE
DUNGEON
PARTY
CAMPAIGN
Not all were invented from scratch by D&D.
But D&D gathered them all into a shared and enormously influential system.
And that vocabulary would be especially important when the computer appears.
32. The next problem: eliminating the referee¶
Here begins our real bridge toward the CRPG.
In a D&D table:
PLAYERS
│
▼
CHARACTERS
│
▼
REFEREE
┌───────┼───────┐
▼ ▼ ▼
MAP RULES WORLD
│ │ │
└───────┼───────┘
▼
RESULT
But a computer does not initially have a human capable of interpreting any intention.
Someone will have to transform:
"What do you want to do?"
into:
- MOVE
- ATTACK
- CAST
- USE
- OPEN
- TAKE
The open freedom of tabletop will have to become a finite set of commands.
33. From the referee to the algorithm¶
Here our entire genealogy reappears in a new form.
KRIEGSSPIEL
│
▼
UMPIRE
│
▼
FREE KRIEGSSPIEL
│
▼
BRAUNSTEIN
│
▼
REFEREE
│
▼
BLACKMOOR
│
▼
DUNGEON MASTER
│
▼
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
│
▼
???
The next layer will have to replace:
REFEREE
with:
SOFTWARE
And then a fascinating problem appears.
The referee can understand:
"I try to distract the guard by rolling a coin down the hallway."
The 1970s computer couldn't.
Therefore, the first CRPG will have to decide:
Which parts of D&D are important enough to be coded?
34. D&D as an imperfect specification for the computer¶
We can interpret D&D in a deliberately anachronistic but useful way.
The ruleset provides:
Data
STR
INT
WIS
DEX
CON
CHA
HP
AC
LEVEL
XP
Entities
CHARACTER
MONSTER
ITEM
SPELL
Space
ROOM
CORRIDOR
DOOR
DUNGEON
WILDERNESS
Procedures
MOVE
ATTACK
DAMAGE
SAVE
CAST
GAIN XP
LEVEL UP
State
alive
dead
wounded
poisoned
equipped
known
unknown
To a programmer, this begins to look suspiciously familiar.
D&D had already performed part of an essential operation:
converting fantasy into manipulable abstractions.
35. What the computer will inherit easily¶
Some parts of D&D are extraordinarily easy to imagine as software:
- Hit Points
- Experience Points
- Levels
- Armor Class
- Attack tables
- Saving throws
- Spell slots
- Inventory
- Monster statistics
- Dungeon coordinates
- Random encounters
- Treasure tables
They are numbers, states, tables, and procedures.
The computer is extraordinarily good with them.
36. What the computer will lose¶
Other parts are much more difficult.
Especially:
open adjudication.
The human referee can respond to an action that no one had anticipated.
The computer can only execute what the programmer has represented.
Therefore:
TABLETOP RPG
narrative possibilities
↓
enormous
↓
referee
will initially become:
COMPUTER RPG
programmed actions
↓
limited set
↓
algorithm
The CRPG gains:
- speed;
- calculation;
- automatic persistence;
- representation;
- constant simulation.
But it loses a huge part of interpretive freedom.
37. The dungeon as a perfect candidate¶
Here we understand even better why the dungeon crawler is so important to CRPG history.
The dungeon already has an easily formalizable structure:
ROOM
│
CORRIDOR
│
DOOR
│
ROOM
It can easily become:
GRID
│
CELL
│
EDGE
│
ENTITY
And the most frequent actions can also be reduced:
- MOVE
- TURN
- OPEN
- ATTACK
- CAST
- TAKE
The dungeon limits the possibility space enough for a primitive computer to represent it.
It's not a coincidence that so many early attempts to transfer D&D to computer focus precisely on dungeons.
38. From the table to the mainframe¶
Our complete genealogy can now be extended:
KRIEGSSPIEL
│
▼
WARGAMING
│
▼
BRAUNSTEIN
│
▼
TWIN CITIES SCHOOL
│
▼
BLACKMOOR
│
├─────────────────────┐
│ │
│ CHAINMAIL
│ │
└────────┬────────────┘
▼
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
1974
│
▼
RPG AS SYSTEM
│
▼
UNIVERSITIES +
MAINFRAMES
│
▼
?
That question mark will be our next layer.
39. Archaeological synthesis¶
After tracing from Kriegsspiel to D&D, we can formulate a provisional conclusion.
Dungeons & Dragons did not appear as an isolated invention.
It was the result of decades of evolution and the convergence of different communities.
In the Twin Cities, Wesley and other wargamers experimented with individual characters, asymmetric information, and referee adjudication.
Arneson turned part of that tradition into Blackmoor, where characters and world gained persistence.
In Lake Geneva, Perren and Gygax worked on formalizing medieval and fantasy combat through Chainmail.
Arneson and Gygax connected both trajectories and collaborated to produce D&D.
The great historical innovation of the product can be stated as:
An experience that depended on specific communities and specific referees became a set of documented abstractions that strangers could use to build their own campaigns.
D&D did not eliminate the referee.
But it formalized enough of the world surrounding the referee to make the game transmittable.
40. The anchor toward the CRPG¶
Here ends the prehistory that RPG Archaeology needed to build.
Our excavation began with armies represented on battlefields.
It ends with persistent individuals exploring imaginary worlds.
ARMY
↓
UNIT
↓
INDIVIDUAL
↓
CHARACTER
↓
PERSISTENT CHARACTER
↓
PARTY
↓
DUNGEON
↓
CAMPAIGN
And simultaneously:
MILITARY ARBITER
↓
UMPIRE
↓
REFEREE
↓
DUNGEON MASTER
↓
???
The next stage of RPG Archaeology will precisely try to answer what occupied that last place.
When students and programmers with computer access began to know D&D, some of its abstractions seemed almost designed to be programmed:
numbers, tables, statistics, maps, monsters, experience, treasures, and combat.
The next step was inevitable.
Turn the ruleset into code.
41. Open questions¶
Issues that should be kept for future excavations:
- What exactly did Gygax see during the first Blackmoor demonstrations?
- What documentation did Arneson and Gygax exchange during 1972–1974?
- Which parts of the OD&D manuscript can be attributed documentally to each one?
- What elements came from collaborators and players?
- What Blackmoor rules were discarded?
- What specific Chainmail elements survived in OD&D?
- Why did the Alternative Combat System based on d20 end up prevailing?
- How did the referee concept evolve until the figure of the Dungeon Master?
- How were the contractual rights initially divided?
- What factors really explain Arneson's departure from TSR?
- How should the creation of AD&D be interpreted historically?
- Which claims about the Arneson/Gygax conflict come from contemporary documentation and which from later memories?
- When did the expression role-playing game begin to be stably used?
- Which OD&D elements were the first to be transferred to software?
- What did the authors of the first mainframe RPGs really know about D&D?
The last two questions already belong to another excavation.
42. Sources and documentary criteria¶
For this document, we maintain the same source hierarchy used in previous investigations.
Contemporary documentation¶
Should receive priority when available:
- original editions of Chainmail;
- 1974 OD&D;
- fanzines;
- correspondence;
- Castle & Crusade Society documents;
- contracts;
- legal documentation;
- preserved maps and notes.
Participant testimonies¶
They are especially valuable to reconstruct practices that were never formally written down.
The documentary:
is particularly useful to reconstruct the Twin Cities ecosystem and contrast later narratives about Wesley, Arneson, and Blackmoor.
It should be classified as retrospective testimony, not contemporary documentation.
Secondary historical research¶
Modern reconstructions are especially useful for relating scattered documents, but controversial claims about authorship, priority, or causality should always be contrasted when possible.
43. Final methodological note¶
RPG Archaeology does not intend to solve the history of Dungeons & Dragons through a competition between its creators.
The evidence examined so far suggests something much more interesting.
COMMUNITIES
│
┌──────┴──────┐
▼ ▼
TWIN CITIES LAKE GENEVA
│ │
BRAUNSTEIN CHAINMAIL
│ │
BLACKMOOR │
└──────┬──────┘
▼
ARNESON + GYGAX
│
▼
DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
│
▼
NEW MEDIUM