Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
Share Thread:
[Blog] The "Blackmoor is Just a Chainmail Variant" Fallacy
#2
Some very interesting comments have been posted on the blog:

Thorfinn Tait March 1, 2016 at 3:34 PM Wrote:I've never understood the controversy over all these issues. It seems clear enough that both Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson had a hand in the creation of the game, and the genre. I don't really see the point of debating how much either man did. It's occasionally fun to read objective articles (like this one) delving into the roots of the mechanics of the game, but the controversy just puts me off.

Zenopus Archives March 1, 2016 at 5:30 PM Wrote:I agree generally with your post. The one point I would quibble is that The Fantasy Supplement of Chainmail is a mere aferthought. It is 14 of the total of 44 pages, so nearly a third of the content. That's a significant chunk of the product. I'd guess it felt like even more at the time since there was so little fantasy wargame rules available.

Rob Kuntz March 2, 2016 at 12:10 AM Wrote:Let's make this simple: Direct line of descent through using backwards causality notes that if D&D is derived from any single source that that source must be able to reproduce the causes and effects as noted in the new source. When applied to Chainmail vs. Blackmoor this does not hold up, thus Braunstein and Chainmail are influences only and have nothing more to do with the leap that Arneson made to the original, what is now called, RPG engine. I detail this more concisely in my upcoming book.

-Havard
Currently Running: The Blackmoor Vales Saga
Currently Playing: Daniel S. Debelfry in the Throne of Star's Campaign
Reply


Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)