Back when 1st edition was the newest edition, which was when I started playing, we used the crap out of Appendices A to E.
A, B, and C probably saw the most use. These were the ones with random dungeon terrain, random wilderness terrain and random monster encounters. They were immediately useful in the preparation for and application during actual play. You used the fuck out of these; in fact, outside of the sections on magic items and gems, those three appendices were undoubtedly the MOST used sections of the entire book for me. It was a big part of where I got my love of random tables, and also learned the lessons about using them properly (for example, making a dungeon with Appendix A 'by the book' would almost never work right, so you needed to learn how to adjust tables to fit what you actually wanted and what actually worked).
Appendix D was for "lower planes creatures" and became a huge inspiration for weird and crazy monsters.
Appendix E was purely a practical section: it listed in pure stat-block all the monsters, which seems not that sensible but was in fact essential for a young kid that didn't own the Monster Manual yet, or for someone who didn't want to carry both books around with him. In the days when a D&D game might happen anywhere, and where you already had a backpack full of textbooks, that was damn useful!
Even beyond these key choices, though, ALL the other Appendices had some basis in actual PLAYABILITY. Be it tricks, traps, summoned monsters, or the gambling rules; they were all for using.
All except Appendix N. In actual history, as I lived it at least, Appendix N was the one you just skipped over. The only memory I have of it was once or twice comparing with friends as to how many of the books on it we'd read, and it was always a near-tie, because we'd mostly all read all of the books that were actually popular and none of those that weren't.
Now, even if you were to believe the nostalgia and ideologically-driven delusions of certain OSR segments, even then Appendix N wasn't for using; it was for ruminating on, and thinking deep literary thoughts about, and assigning a seriousness to D&D that in no way matched how we tended to play. But no one I knew did that kind of bullshit back then; not until "Vampire: the Masquerade" showed up.
Which kind of makes sense, because the retroactive "importance" of Appendix N was largely invented by a reject White-Wolf fanboy and total johnny-come-lately to Old School D&D: James Maliszewski.
Appendix N's popularity only arose because of this entryist, "JMal": an internet kickstarter fraud, World-of-Darkness fanatic and pretend OSR guy, who only got into it when he had the sense to see that White Wolf was dead and that there was rubes to fleece and money to make off the OSR. It makes sense Maliszewski would claim to love and promote the endless study of the minutiae of Appendix N: it has no play content, but tons of pretentiousness-potential. Appendix N itself was nothing more than just a list of 'cool shit Gygax liked', but in the hands of Maliszewski and his cohorts it was all about pretending to be literary critics and getting to be judgmental about what is "real old school", and finding some kind of quasi-esoteric "primordial UR-D&D" to show you're more old-school than anyone else.
It's all about trying to push an OSR that's exclusionary and reactionary, rather than innovative and creative.
If you want to do stuff that's about creativity, look at EVERY OTHER Appendix in the DMG. Let those inspire you. Let the random tables and the lists and the ideas for play inspire you, rather than looking for some kind of bible of Gygax-Approved books to tell you the only right way to play D&D.
Nobody is suggesting that you not read the books on the list! I've read quite a lot of the books and authors there myself, though certainly not all.
What I am saying is that the J. Maliszewski Serial Wankers Club For Talmudic Studies that has formed around the least-useful appendix in the DMG has chosen to dedicate hours to the study of that Appendix N, and not to Appendices A, B, C, D-M, or O or P, because N suits a goal of creating the attitude that the way one group thinks old-school should be run is the 'right', 'true', 'original' version of some kind of primordial Ur-D&D of which all other versions are just sad falls from some golden age that never was.
If you think the OSR should be about innovation and creativity, about how to create, within the 'box' of the design rules of old-school, amazing NEW stuff, instead of rooting through the Gygax family home's garbage bags in search of old shopping lists to try to get some grasp of how to play D&D as 'purely' as possible, then I would strongly recommend you try to put some real hard time into carefully examining, studying and experimenting with every appendix in the DMG except for Appendix-fucking-N.
RPGPundit
Currently Smoking: Italian Redbark Billiard + Argento Latakia
(June 6, 2016)
Whatever happened to that old fraud Maliszewski, anyway? Last I heard he was still moping over his dad dying like he was the only person to ever lose a family member. I half-expected him to start running around in a bat costume.
ReplyDeleteHe keeps trying to make a comeback. Fortunately there's some of us who will never let anyone forget what he did.
DeletePlanning a long con takes time, gentle sirs. Be of good cheer, I shall re-emerge with "Return to Dwimmermount". Yes, the legendary Dwimmermount, in all its 2000cp glory. It will be for OSR games, and maybe this new-fangled 5e D&D that the kids are all playing. I have not yet decided, since I hear this 5e D&D has genderfluid elves. That sort of thing leads to bastardy, and I cannot be a part of that.
DeleteI do need a new top-of-the-line laptop. Should I avail myself of Indiegogo or GoFundMe? Also, my personal library is a bit sparse. If any of you have spare OSR materials, or any orginal materials or games, in not too beat up condition, you may send them to me. I will graciously accept them free of charge.
Good one, Jim.
DeleteSo, basically there's this kind you dln't like and he's really into Appendix N so Appendix N is crap and also you didn't use it back in the day so of course no one did either.
ReplyDeleteThat's... definitely a post.
Nobody "used" Appendix N, because it's not a useable item. You can't roll on it and tell your players, "Hold on a minute while I go read Three Hearts and Three Lions." You have to do that on your own time, so it's less useful in actual play than a wandering monster table.
DeleteNow, those books might give you some inspiration for your game, or you might find it academically interesting to know what inspired Gygax, but ultimately it's recommended reading, not required reading. They're not going to teach you the True and Proper Way to Play D&D, as Maliszewski preached.
As a point of logic, not being able to use a thing in a particular way ("You can't roll on it and tell your players...") does not preclude you using it in another way (those books might give you some inspiration for your game....).
DeleteIt should be abundantly obvious to anyone that if, for instance, you are running a dungeon you wrote, you wrote it on your own time, away from the table, but it still has playability at the table. Likewise, if you are running DCC Lankhmar, your reading of the Leiber stories away from the table can lead directly to playability at the table. Nor is this a corner case - a grounding in adventure literature can help your improv when the PCs go left instead of right.
Many of these stories also have elements that can be "homaged" directly into an adventure or setting - see the Sanctum Secorum podcast, and the Episode Companions of the same, for many examples.
Your final line, btw, is exactly a summation of what Thomas Vanstraelen wrote. There's this kid you didn't like and he's really into Appendix N so Appendix N is crap. That's as much OneTrueWayism as what you are accusing Maliszewski of.
Recommended not required? Sure.
Therefore useless? No.
The fact that pretentious assholes like Appendix N has no bearing on whether or not it was a historical truth that there were no "Appendix N Talmudic Studies Associations" going on in 1983.
DeleteThe JMal wing of the OSR is FALSELY claiming that Appendix N had HUGE importance to the genuine old-school period. IT DID NOT.
The attitude of the people involved, me or them, has no bearing on that history.
Meh.
DeleteThere is a difference between saying "Appendix N had little importance to the genuine old-school period" and "Appendix N was useless".
As I said:
Recommended not required? Sure.
Therefore useless? No.
Appendix N doesn't work because AD&D was an everything but the kitchen sink version of a game. Something similar might work well for more modern games and supplements that seek to emulate a specific subgenre.
ReplyDeleteWasn't Appendix N just a list of books that Gary Gygax liked and not much else beyond that?
ReplyDeleteYep. It's what he liked. His reading list. And that is what it remains. I have my own, others do too. They are not the Dead Sea Scrolls of D&D. They're just inspirational reading if they inspire you or bonfire material if they do not.
DeleteCorrect. And note, the only person really qualified to talk about it here, since he actually played at Gygax's table.
DeleteOnce again, there is a difference between saying "Appendix N are not the Dead Sea Scrolls of D&D" and "Appendix N was useless".
DeleteAs I said:
Recommended not required? Sure.
Therefore useless? No.
Oh, and he is not the only person qualified to talk about it here. You do not need to play at Gary's table to know whether or not you found this or that part of the DMG more useful than some other part.
DeleteOnce the argument shifts to whether or not Appendix N is a list of sacred texts, you don't need to have played with Gary to know that they are not. When people refer to them as such, I would hope their tongues are firmly in cheek.
No one said "useless". It's the Least Useful (or at least tied with the least useful) of the appendices for actual D&D play.
DeleteIn actual play? I never made a dungeon using the random method in actual play, and seldom used them at all. I never used the random encounter tables, preferring to tailor each area in the game world. I didn't need the random tables for that.
DeleteI have gotten more use from a good background in adventure fantasy fiction (Appendix N and otherwise) than I have from, say, random wilderness terrain.
BTW, while no one said "useless", the comment that brought me in was:
DeleteNobody "used" Appendix N, because it's not a useable item.
Saying something is not usable is effectively saying it is useless.
In this case, it's the difference between utility and reference/theory.
DeletePeople who like the theory of Ur-D&D think appendix N is the most important thing in the entire DMG, which they otherwise act dismissive of (compared to the purity of earlier editions).
People who like actually playing D&D think it's the least useful appendix, because you do not use it at all in the game.
I don't think it is either the most or the least important or useful appendix or part of the DMG. Sorry, but it's relative value is not black and white, and you are now invoking the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
DeleteIt is okay to find Appendix N useful. It is okay not to. Just like anything else.
If you think Appendix N wasn't helpful to you personally, fine. If you want to poop on an important OSR icon like James, alrighty then. However, DCC wouldn't exist without it. Goodman has said as much publicly. So, I think your attack on Appendix N is unwarranted. It was then and is now, hoss.
ReplyDeleteI have a famous DCC campaign, played regularly for five years now.
DeleteBut if you look at DCC, there's almost nothing in it that's actually "appendix N" as such. It's pretty much just "gonzo D&D". There's nothing there that is explicitly notable as being a sign of influences of the Appendix N books or authors list, mainly because that list is such a huge hodgepodge of influences that you couldn't really make a game out of it that would have any coherent look at all.
"DCC is Appendix N roleplaying" was a MARKETING TOOL they used at a time that Appendix N was the rage with JMal's cultists. Back when he was an 'important osr icon' and not yet revealed as a fucking fraud who cheated a group of rubes.
In fact, if you were to ask someone expert in 20th century english lit (without bringing up appendix N) about the literary influences of DCC, they would likely say "a mix of Fritz Leiber, Tolkien, Elric and Hunter S. Thompson".
You forgot Lovecraft! Also, what about Jack Vance? Would there be D&D without Appendix N? Nope.
DeleteDid Goodman say it had been a marketing tool all along or are you just guessing?
There's very little lovecraft in DCC. There's only a bit of Jack Vance.
DeleteIt's not guessing, it's obvious if you've actually read Appendix N's books, versus what DCC is actually like. It's not any more or any less appendix N than D&D, it just shifted some of the emphasis from some of the books that were the main influence on D&D to those very same books weighted slightly differently. It's not like DCC is way more Three Hearts & Three Lions or Sign of the Labrys than AD&D. It's just a bit less tolkien and a bit more moorcock, that's it.
And the rest is 70s Nostalgia and gonzo aesthetic.
In fact, DCC OWES MORE to Hunter S Thompson than it does to any writer on the Appendix N list other than Tolkien/Moorcock/Leiber.
I've read quite a few Appendix N books, and I am pretty sure that there is more direct influence on DCC than on AD&D 1e. In fact, I would say it is very obvious to anyone who has read the books and read/played the game system.
DeleteIf the system itself doesn't make this obvious, the official adventures certainly should. Goodman Games has gone out of its way to try to create homages to/reproduce the feeling of Appendix N works in at least some of its adventures. This is not guess work; I have written a couple of them. Some of these came with specific works to try to evoke.
*The way that YOU play DCC* owes more to Hunter S. Thompson than, say, Abraham Merritt or Andre Norton. It doesn't follow that the same is true for the *system as a whole*.
There is a reason why adventures take you to other planets in DCC, and it has nothing to do with the triumvirate of Tolkien, Moorcock, and Leiber. There is as much Lord Dunsany, Abraham Merritt, and Andre Norton in the patron system as there is Moorcock and Leiber.
And this really is not guessing.