Gygax's Dungeon Design

Theory of Games said:

Gygax's real genius was in allowing D/GMs to shape the rules into what we like. He paved the way for the OSR.

Click to expand...

I want to be careful either giving Gygax too much credit or too little.

He was certainly a key figure in the creation of the RPG, but his own approach to rules varies quite a bit over time. Certainly the earliest D&D publications do have a focus on referee freedom and creativity ... but for Gygax at least the quickly changes. His rather nasty editorials in Strategic Review/Dragon about people not playing as he'd prefer start by 1976 and his own tendency when it comes to mechanics seems to have been add more and more, rather haphazardly. Even in the sort of world building the DMG's random generation tables create. In this kind of design there's a totalizing impulse that lots like an effort to preclude others from creatively filling their worlds and settings by filling all available space. I don't really want to argue about the legacy of Gygax, I don't find that discussion especially compelling. Gygax was a relentless (though not always great) self promoter - there's no need to lionize him more or turn his ideas into some sort of dogma.

I think he wrote some good adventures. How he managed it, how they are distinct from other good adventures, and what tools I can take from them is what I'm largely interested in.

Theory of Games said:

Gygax's real genius was in allowing D/GMs to shape the rules into what we like. He paved the way for the OSR.

Click to expand...

You should read The Elusive Shift. And really any primary source material about the development of RPGs in the 70s

That wasn't Gary's innovation. That was a baseline assumption of the wargaming and Diplomacy culture he came up in and in which Dave Wesely, Dave Arneson, and Gygax created their role-playing games.

In his letters to Alarums & Excursions in 1975 Gary was very encouraging of folks making the game their own, when he was trying to sell the game to an existing culture of wargamers and sci-fi fans. As Gus points out, a few years later once other publishers got in on the act and folks started making variants and playing D&D ways he disapproved of, Gary got super prescriptive and territorial*.

*EDIT: One of the things that When We Were Wizards makes distressingly clear is how much Gary felt and acted like he owned the concept of RPGs and D&D in particular. Like he deserved all the royalties (even when they were a crushing burden to the company) and fame, but actively worked to prevent other people, especially younger designers working at his own company, from getting the same kind (even to a lesser degree) of financial reward from it. How disingenuous he was in signing an agreement to assign his rights to TSR and requiring everyone else to do so, while later making it clear that he never intended to be bound by it himself.

Gygax was a game genius, but nobody's perfect. He created the hobby and made it hugely popular.

How does Gygax’s level design compare to Jacquays’s level design? It seems to me like he borrowed a page from her and applied the military units but the overall design aspects of multiple points of entry probably originated with her.

TiQuinn said:

How does Gygax’s level design compare to Jacquays’s level design? It seems to me like he borrowed a page from her and applied the military units but the overall design aspects of multiple points of entry probably originated with her.

Click to expand...

Most of the advice about multiple entrances, levels and such are found or implied in OD&D as of 1974. It seems unlikely Gygax is borrowing much from her, largely because their design is rather different.

Jaquays was an amazing designer, and her maps/level design are extremely good.

They aren't what make her adventures great though... Jaquays does something even more important in her design, even with it's first published iteration -- "F'Chelrek's Tomb" (one of the first published dungeons). Jaquays actually included detail and description, otherwise lacking from a lot of early design. Gygax does as well, to a lesser degree and for different reasons. Jaquays designed her dungeons so that exploration and paying attention to the description allows discovery and reveals secrets that benefit the players. Her design generally rewards curiosity and inquisitiveness in a way that was novel during the early era of dungeon design.

I think among certain circles there's been an over emphasis on Jaquays' map design and too little attention paid to how her adventures work in play -- specifically what types of play they emphasize or encourage.

Theory of Games said:

Gygax was a game genius, but nobody's perfect. He created the hobby and made it hugely popular.

Click to expand...

Gary was a tireless promoter, a voluminous writer, and clearly had a gift for expanding on other people's game designs. As he did with Perren's wargame rules and Leonard Pat's Middle Earth wargame rules to make the incredibly popular Fantasy Supplement for Chainmail. And as he did with Dave Arneson's concept and rough notes for Blackmoor to create D&D.

He came up with some very good and timeless D&D scenarios. His later design efforts are sadly less inspired. Prolix and largely unplayable. Cyborg Commando and Dangerous Journeys (née Dimensions) were famously terrible, for example.

Mannahnin said:

Gary was a tireless promoter, a voluminous writer, and clearly had a gift for expanding on other people's game designs.

Click to expand...

I'd add that his self-promotion also stretched as far as screwing over and suing his friends. I think D&D would be in a far better place if Gygax hadn't seen it as his way to get wealthy quick, and followed through with the intentions he claimed in OD&D and Blackmoor's introduction. However...

"I come [to discuss Gygax's dungeon design], not to praise him. The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones..."

Gus L said:

I'd add that his self-promotion also stretched as far as screwing over and suing his friends. I think D&D would be in a far better place if Gygax hadn't seen it as his way to get wealthy quick, and followed through with the intentions he claimed in OD&D and Blackmoor's introduction. However...

"I come [to discuss Gygax's dungeon design], not to praise him. The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones..."

Click to expand...

Sure. I didn't want to hit that same point again in the same thread.

Gus L said:

"I come [to discuss Gygax's dungeon design], not to praise him. The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones..."

Click to expand...

What is that supposed to mean?

Theory of Games said:

What is that supposed to mean?

Click to expand...

It's a quote from Mark Antony's eulogy in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar".

I'm am using it here for humorous effect saying I don't particularly care about Gygax's alleged greatness or flaws. My interest is on how his adventures read and play and what we, as adventure designers, can learn from them.

I take that to be a specific style of location based adventure design that is focused on conflict with an organized and powerful faction. Gygax designs or adapts certain tools to do this: most clearly "orders of battle", and alarm mechanics, but also, and more important, he also designs the entire location naturalistically making note of potential tools and opportunities for the party. I believe these ideas and design forms are all thing we can use today to write better adventures.