[Blog] The "Blackmoor is Just a Chainmail Variant" Fallacy

[Havard]

More comments on the blog:

I believe none of the "camps" have the utter truth here, and even the memories of the persons involved was somewhat shaded by their their shared history and disappointments with each other.
Without Gygax' business savvy or Arnesons leap of imagination from wargaming to roleplaying we wouldn't have DD ... and maybe not the hobby as is ..
:-)

I totally agree with your conclusion. As to which camp has the answer, my main point was simply that both camps have been asking the wrong question. It doesn't really matter what combat system Dave Arneson used because it was not the combat system that was the revolutionary part of Blackmoor. Pretty much what Rob is saying I think.

I think it can be very interesting to discuss the various influences that Dave Arneson and his group borrowed from. Also, the same question can be put to Gary and his group. But ultimately we need to recognize that Blackmoor and D&D were new inventions, different from what came before in spite of making use of various ideas existing out there.

Rob Kuntz to Jan Egil:

The idea of WE having a hobby or not is irrelevant in ascertaining the line of descent of the original RPG engine, which was being used several years prior to Gygax's, or my own, involvement with it. Who starts what and as influenced or derived from what is the issue, and not its end-point commercialization.

Cheers!

Rob Kuntz to me:

Havard. Thanks! Yes. The combat system, all of Blackmoor's or D&D's "game systems," are the actual sub-systems of what became D&D (or remained Blackmoor). They are just different iterations (Dave's and then Gary's, and then my own, et al, forwarded to the present as individual "takes"). It's the conceptual system interface on steroids that Arneson moved to that makes it leaps above anything preceding it.

Anybody who actually claims that about Blackmoor is a booger-eating moron and should be ignored as hard as possible.

-Havard