The Term "Arnesonian"

[Havard]

In the end, is there such a thing as "Arnesonian"? I'm not sure who first used it, but I am pretty sure it comes from Gygaxian, which I am also not really sure what means.

Perhaps this quote can give us a hint to some of the ideals behind Arneson's game design?

As I have said many times before. Work with what works for you. But be very aware that this adds complications and draw you and your players away from the real treasure, THE STORY. Always remember too that the PLAYER WOULD actually not know the monster stats etc. The have to learn them the hard way Maybe you pack train is loaded down with hundreds of obscure scrolls and tomes. Mine weren't.

"Roll the dice and I will tell you you hit!"

Source: http://odd74.proboards.com/index.cgi?ac ... 775&page=1

Thoughts?

-Havard

[TheMystic]

I would comment here that an Arnesonian Ideal is embodied in his repetitive calls for the players to have fun. Dave didn't really care at all about the rules. He would generally ignore them outright if it served the greater enjoyment for the group. That's hard to swallow for rules lawyers, but it embodies the first, and arguably, most important thing that Dave wanted.

This is often a stark contrast to other designers who want to have a lock on their campaign settings and the canon behind it. Dave always cared, but he would reiterate that there are "many Blackmoors, this is only one".

Dustin

[aldarron]

I don't know if you noticed this Havard, but that was the last webpost Dave made.

[Havard]

I would comment here that an Arnesonian Ideal is embodied in his repetitive calls for the players to have fun. Dave didn't really care at all about the rules. He would generally ignore them outright if it served the greater enjoyment for the group. That's hard to swallow for rules lawyers, but it embodies the first, and arguably, most important thing that Dave wanted.

An excellent point Dustin! It makes sense too, when you think about how the Minnesota guys turned to proto-RPGs such as Braunstein and later Blackmoor according to some sources because they wanted to get away from the lengthy rules arguments dominating parts of the war gaming scene back in the late 1960s.

This is often a stark contrast to other designers who want to have a lock on their campaign settings and the canon behind it. Dave always cared, but he would reiterate that there are "many Blackmoors, this is only one".

Yeah, it doesnt seem like Dave to have been interested in forcing others to play "his way". On the other hands, for the internet fan community, it is Dave's ideas that unite us

I don't know if you noticed this Havard, but that was the last webpost Dave made.

-Havard

[finarvyn]

I swear that there is another thread like this one. Maybe it's on DF and not here. Seems like a topic we've visited before... 8)

Yeah, it doesnt seem like Dave to have been interested in forcing others to play "his way".

Yet, when Dave thought that players didn't play "his way" he sometimes involked a "wrath of God" kind of punishment where characters might take damage every round for not playing right, etc. Rules lawyers seem to be the focus of a lot of bad karma in Dave's campaigns.

For me, much of the "Arnesonian way" is playing with rules only known to the Referee. Dave seems to have enjoyed a loose style with few rules at all on occasion, where he had total control of when characters leveled up and kept monster stats hidden from his players so that they couldn't challenge his rulings. But that in itself doesn't really define the way Dave did it, since a lot of his rules sets seem to be quite complex when he wanted them to be.

Another trait of an "Arnesonian" game seems to be a mix of styles in one place, such as the introduction of Star Trek tricorders into his First Fantasy Campaign rules. I don't like to think of Blackmoor as a highly technological place, but instead as a place where occasionally at random one might find some unexpectedly cool item that doesn't really fit the setting. The serendipity of Dave's campaign seems like it made Blackmoor a fun place to play in.

A third trait I see is that of freedom. If a player wanted to be a vampire or a cleric or a balrog, Dave didn't worry about the fact that there weren't rules for it but allowed it anyway and (it sounds like) worked out rules as needed. Dave doesn't seem to have been limited by the rules and encouraged his players to think "outside the box" as well.

Just my two coppers.

[Havard]

I swear that there is another thread like this one. Maybe it's on DF and not here. Seems like a topic we've visited before... 8)

Im sure it could be!

Yet, when Dave thought that players didn't play "his way" he sometimes involked a "wrath of God" kind of punishment where characters might take damage every round for not playing right, etc. Rules lawyers seem to be the focus of a lot of bad karma in Dave's campaigns.

I hadnt heard about the Wrath of God mode, but he clearly had a dislike for rules lawyers (who hasnt?)
That is pretty interesting though.

For me, much of the "Arnesonian way" is playing with rules only known to the Referee. Dave seems to have enjoyed a loose style with few rules at all on occasion, where he had total control of when characters leveled up and kept monster stats hidden from his players so that they couldn't challenge his rulings. But that in itself doesn't really define the way Dave did it, since a lot of his rules sets seem to be quite complex when he wanted them to be.

True. Of course, the rules were "under construction" when most of the campaign happened. But Dave had obviously had some bad experiences with games being bogged down by rules discussions back in the war gaming days so it seems he was intent to avoid that here. IMO this style of game only works as long as there is a bond of trust between the players and the GM. I think there was such a bond in the Minnesota group, at least with the ones who stuck with the game for the long haul.

OTOH, Greg DMed many sessions independently of Dave, and other players also took on the role of Refree, so it couldnt all have been secret?

Another trait of an "Arnesonian" game seems to be a mix of styles in one place, such as the introduction of Star Trek tricorders into his First Fantasy Campaign rules. I don't like to think of Blackmoor as a highly technological place, but instead as a place where occasionally at random one might find some unexpectedly cool item that doesn't really fit the setting. The serendipity of Dave's campaign seems like it made Blackmoor a fun place to play in.

I think you are spot on here.

A third trait I see is that of freedom. If a player wanted to be a vampire or a cleric or a balrog, Dave didn't worry about the fact that there weren't rules for it but allowed it anyway and (it sounds like) worked out rules as needed. Dave doesn't seem to have been limited by the rules and encouraged his players to think "outside the box" as well.

Absolutely. This is really one of the things that draws me to the Arnesonian way of playing. After having the game around for over 30 years it is easy to get stuck in old patterns.


-Havard