# Slaying the Dragon: The Secret History of Dungeons & Dragons Review



## sevenbastard (Jul 14, 2022)

'and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.'

Did anyone even like this format for an adventure? It just seemed unwieldy and gimmicky.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jul 14, 2022)

sevenbastard said:


> 'and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.'
> 
> Did anyone even like this format for an adventure? It just seemed unwieldy and gimmicky.



Made it easy to hide among my various spiral notebooks for class when I would sneak one to school to read while bored between tasks.


----------



## Alzrius (Jul 14, 2022)

sevenbastard said:


> 'and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.'
> 
> Did anyone even like this format for an adventure? It just seemed unwieldy and gimmicky.



No matter how many times I used them, I kept getting confused about whether the next page was the reverse side of the page I was reading, or the same side of the subsequent page (in fact, it's the latter...I'm pretty sure).


----------



## Reynard (Jul 14, 2022)

sevenbastard said:


> 'and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.'
> 
> Did anyone even like this format for an adventure? It just seemed unwieldy and gimmicky.



It is a brilliant idea with a bad execution, so, you know, a late stage TSR product.


----------



## Von Ether (Jul 14, 2022)

Sounds like every every TSR leader either had some self esteem issues or thought they were the smartest person in the room -- or both. Regardless, it seems a lack of due diligence and foresight made TSR's strategies a broken record.


----------



## John R Davis (Jul 14, 2022)

sevenbastard said:


> 'and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.'
> 
> Did anyone even like this format for an adventure? It just seemed unwieldy and gimmicky.



We thought they were great ( GM side and a players side)


----------



## JDR (Jul 14, 2022)

sevenbastard said:


> 'and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.'
> 
> Did anyone even like this format for an adventure? It just seemed unwieldy and gimmicky.



I hated that format, for the reasons you stated


----------



## darjr (Jul 14, 2022)

The basic numbers were known before. See various interviews with TSR people, the latest with Stan! about it’s sales vs the Pokémon role playing game.

Other numbers were known as well.

Ope! Wrong thread.

Just suffice to say I bought the book! Twice!


----------



## Jer (Jul 14, 2022)

Every time I read this kind of thing about TSR:


> For example, the development team had no idea what the sales numbers were so they often continued making products for lines that weren't selling. Worse, some products, like the *Encyclopedia Magica*, had such high production costs that TSR made no money on them and the *Dark Sun* spiral bound flipbooks lost money.



it gobsmacks me every single time.  Just - how? How could nobody in creative or sales think that maybe, just maybe, having a meeting to hash out the things that were selling and the things that weren't might be a good idea? I've never taken a business management class but it really seems like you wouldn't need to have one to think that seeing how product going out and money coming in might just be a good idea.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> Just suffice to say I bought the book! Twice!



I do most of my "reading" in the car while driving 100 miles a day. Does this book work as an audio book, do you think? Or are there too many charts and things?


----------



## Mannahnin (Jul 14, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I do most of my "reading" in the car while driving 100 miles a day. Does this book work as an audio book, do you think? Or are there too many charts and things?



I haven't seen it, but from the reviews and what Ben's been posting, it sounds like the book won't have as many charts precisely because they don't make as good reading.  Jon did the same- sharing more numbers and charts on his blog to supplement the book for folks interested in more detail.


----------



## darjr (Jul 14, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I do most of my "reading" in the car while driving 100 miles a day. Does this book work as an audio book, do you think? Or are there too many charts and things?



I dunno. I listen to podcasts and not books. I will say that Ben has an awesome podcast where he reads sections of the pre edit and essays that I think became part of the book and they are really good. So if it’s anything like that it’d be great! But you could also listen to his cast and then use the book to fill I the gaps.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 14, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> I haven't seen it, but from the reviews and what Ben's been posting, it sounds like the book won't have as many charts precisely because they don't make as good reading.  Jon did the same- sharing more numbers and charts on his blog to supplement the book for folks interested in more detail.



I really liked The Game Wizards as an audiobook, even if I am grumpy I did not buy a physical copy for reference.


----------



## darjr (Jul 14, 2022)

Jer said:


> Every time I read this kind of thing about TSR:
> 
> it gobsmacks me every single time.  Just - how? How could nobody in creative or sales think that maybe, just maybe, having a meeting to hash out the things that were selling and the things that weren't might be a good idea? I've never taken a business management class but it really seems like you wouldn't need to have one to think that seeing how product going out and money coming in might just be a good idea.



I’ve worked at places where the clash between sales and the “creators” was so bad that it was best to never have them meet. Thankfully most of those places figured out another way to tie the two together. I can see where some places may never do that or never get it right. But it does seem like it never even occurred to TSR.


----------



## Jer (Jul 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> I’ve worked at places where the clash between sales and the “creators” was so bad that it was best to never have them meet. Thankfully most of those places figured out another way to tie the two together. I can see where some places may never do that or never get it right. But it does seem like it never even occurred to TSR.



Exactly!  Usually the problem is the exact opposite - the sales team having too much power over the creative side and too much control over what is getting made.

But the idea of sales having no input at all and apparently not even trying?  It's so weird.  Even with the Random House contract stuff muddying up the financials you'd think that there'd at least be a bit of interaction.


----------



## Dungeonosophy (Jul 14, 2022)

Great review—well written and engaging


----------



## Reynard (Jul 14, 2022)

Can @BenRiggs speak to whether the book should work well as an audiobook? I mean, I know he is going to say "yes, buy it!" but I am not asking _whether_ I should buy it, just if I _can_ buy it in audio and get the same value out of it.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 14, 2022)

Bruce Heard had a pretty harsh review of the numbers this guy was posting.  Someone shared them out to the BECMI group on facebook in violation of the group's posting guidelines.  The post was locked, but contained a pretty strong rebuttal from Bruce Heard as its only comment.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 14, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Bruce Heard had a pretty harsh review of the numbers this guy was posting.  Someone shared them out to the BECMI group on facebook in violation of the group's posting guidelines.  The post was locked, but contained a pretty strong rebuttal from Bruce Heard as its only comment.



So long as the source remains anonymous, this will happen and no one has any way of knowing what's true.


----------



## darjr (Jul 14, 2022)

@Michael Linke @Reynard 
His post was a mush mash of things, comments seemed mostly directed at others comments, and he criticized that other sales numbers that Ben intended to release, weren’t there, then he closed it as violating the Marketing rule. 

It’s a public group and post.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> @Michael Linke @Reynard
> His post was a mush mash of things, comments seemed mostly directed at others comments, and he criticized that other sales numbers that Ben intended to release, weren’t there, then he closed it as violating the Marketing rule.
> 
> It’s a public group and post.



Yes, the original post is public.  It was shared to the BECMI group by a third person, not Benjamin Riggs, and that share violated group rules, so the comment thread on the share was locked aside from Bruce's rebuttal.  As the group is currently Public and Visible, i think it's fair for me to quote his review here (admin correct me if i'm wrong).



> @Benjamin Riggs
> <<More actual D&D sales numbers!>>
> Source?
> <<Below you will find the sales numbers of Basic D&D, and then two charts comparing those to the sales of AD&D 1st edition. For those who don’t know, early in its life, the tree of D&D was split in half. On the one side there was D&D, an RPG designed to bring beginners into the game. It was simpler, and didn’t try to have rules for everything.>>
> ...


----------



## darjr (Jul 14, 2022)

@Michael Linke thanks. I’m always iffy about posting from Facebook because there are a few other controls besides “public”


----------



## doctorhook (Jul 14, 2022)

Now to figure out where I can score a copy


----------



## Von Ether (Jul 14, 2022)

Jer said:


> Exactly!  Usually the problem is the exact opposite - the sales team having too much power over the creative side and too much control over what is getting made.
> 
> But the idea of sales having no input at all and apparently not even trying?  It's so weird.  Even with the Random House contract stuff muddying up the financials you'd think that there'd at least be a bit of interaction.




Sadly true. Every newspaper I worked for, the sale department had the latest Macs and the sales people had the nicer cars. the news rooms got their hand me downs. Usually because sales would always point to a revenue sheet to justify their costs. Meanwhile the content makers may be a "black hole" on a spreadsheet, but they are the reason why people are picking up the product.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jul 14, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Yes, the original post is public.  It was shared to the BECMI group by a third person, not Benjamin Riggs, and that share violated group rules, so the comment thread on the share was locked aside from Bruce's rebuttal.  As the group is currently Public and Visible, i think it's fair for me to quote his review here (admin correct me if i'm wrong).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Heard's rebuttal was irritating and cranky, didn't really further the conversation, and didn't really do a good job of rebutting anything. It would have been nice for a more respectful engagement of Rigg's statements with more clear clarifications from Heard's point of view without the unnecessary vitriol.

I have a lot of respect and love for Bruce Heard, as my main game back in the 80s and early 90s was "Basic" D&D and the Mystara campaign that went along with it. I'm impressed with his current work on the Calidar setting, a spiritual successor to Mystara. But Heard isn't doing much here other than throwing out cranky old designer energy.


----------



## darjr (Jul 14, 2022)

Is anyone here going to this? Willing to record it?









						Ben Riggs, author of SLAYING THE DRAGON - an in-person Boswell event
					

Ben Riggs, author of SLAYING THE DRAGON - an in-person Boswell event




					www.eventbrite.com


----------



## robowieland (Jul 15, 2022)

darjr said:


> Is anyone here going to this? Willing to record it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I might, though it will probably have a lot of the same content as his Gen Con seminars.

I remember him discussing something about an official audiobook but I don't know if that went anywhere.


----------



## darjr (Jul 15, 2022)

robowieland said:


> I might, though it will probably have a lot of the same content as his Gen Con seminars.
> 
> I remember him discussing something about an official audiobook but I don't know if that went anywhere.



They are going to record it after all!

There is an audio book offering on Amazon. Not sure what that is.


----------



## darjr (Jul 15, 2022)

@robowieland here is a screen cap of the audio book details in audible.




Listening Length10 hours and 28 minutes
Author Ben Riggs
Narrator Sean Patrick Hopkins
Whispersync for Voice Ready (Learn More)
Audible.com Release DateJuly 19, 2022
Publisher Macmillan Audio
Program Type Audiobook
Version Unabridged
Language English
ASIN B09GCWQ99J


----------



## Reynard (Jul 15, 2022)

darjr said:


> @robowieland here is a screen cap of the audio book details in audible.
> View attachment 253823
> 
> Listening Length10 hours and 28 minutes
> ...



Yeah, but is it a good fit for an audiobook. They make audiobooks of all sorts of things. I was hoping to get an answer from someone familiar with the book whether it is well suited to audio or if it has a lot of figures and tables.


----------



## Erdric Dragin (Jul 15, 2022)

Ironically, we got the best and most material for D&D during those times. I prefer that over the measly scraps WotC puts out every few months. I miss seeing several new D&D material a month from the combination of published products to Dragon and Dungeon Magazine combined


----------



## darjr (Jul 15, 2022)

Erdric Dragin said:


> Ironically, we got the best and most material for D&D during those times. I prefer that over the measly scraps WotC puts out every few months. I miss seeing several new D&D material a month from the combination of published products to Dragon and Dungeon Magazine combined



we are drowning in 5e D&D riches. From MCDM, Kobold Press, ENWorld Press, Sly Flourish, 2C Gaming, Ghostfire Gaming, etc etc etc

What's more is it's supporting an industry outside of WotC which is fantastic.

And these companies are doing well. Much better than a single company slowly drowning and imploding in no small part by competing with itself.


----------



## darjr (Jul 15, 2022)

Here he is reading a prerelease section of his book from GenCon. Note I’m not 100% shure if it’s directly from the book or something that was later put into the book.


----------



## Riley (Jul 15, 2022)

brimmels said:


> _“The winters are so frigid that Lake Michigan steams, sending great gouts of silver billowing skyward, girding the horizon from north to south....In winter, the world recedes to the circle of warmth around a fire, a heater, or the side of a loved one._




Off point, but if Southeast Wisconsin was actually cold, Lake Michigan would properly freeze like Lake Superior, instead of merely steaming.

- a former Milwaukeean, now Minnesotan.

p.s. Thanks for the review. It sounds like an interesting read!


----------



## brimmels (Jul 15, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I do most of my "reading" in the car while driving 100 miles a day. Does this book work as an audio book, do you think? Or are there too many charts and thingsI


----------



## brimmels (Jul 15, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I do most of my "reading" in the car while driving 100 miles a day. Does this book work as an audio book, do you think? Or are there too many charts and things?



It works very well as an audiobook. The publisher actually provided me with both the audiobook and ebook versions (I can read an audiobook much faster but need a book/ebook to confirm the spellings of names and such). The audiobook reader is excellent. 
As far as the charts go, the publisher decided not to include them, which is why Riggs is posting them on his social media accounts. The book talks about the sales numbers, and in a very engaging way, singling out the key details to make a point without bogging down the story. 

So if you like audiobooks, you should like this one. Then if you're curious about more sales information, check out the link to Riggs' Twitter account that I included in the last paragraph of my review. It takes you directly to the first set of charts.


----------



## brimmels (Jul 15, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Can @BenRiggs speak to whether the book should work well as an audiobook? I mean, I know he is going to say "yes, buy it!" but I am not asking _whether_ I should buy it, just if I _can_ buy it in audio and get the same value out of it.



For my review I listened to the audiobook and then used the ebook to check the spellings of names and such. It works great as an audiobook. If you want charts, though, you have to check Riggs' social media because the publisher declined to include them. Instead he cites key points as part of the story.


----------



## brimmels (Jul 15, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Yeah, but is it a good fit for an audiobook. They make audiobooks of all sorts of things. I was hoping to get an answer from someone familiar with the book whether it is well suited to audio or if it has a lot of figures and tables.



I just answered this for two other people in this thread.


----------



## overgeeked (Jul 15, 2022)

Reynard said:


> So long as the source remains anonymous, this will happen and no one has any way of knowing what's true.



Exactly. It’s possible his figures are accurate. But when people who were there and would have access to the numbers say no, it’s a red flag.


----------



## darjr (Jul 15, 2022)

overgeeked said:


> Exactly. It’s possible his figures are accurate. But when people who were there and would have access to the numbers say no, it’s a red flag.



There also corroborating instances too.


----------



## QuentinGeorge (Jul 15, 2022)

overgeeked said:


> Exactly. It’s possible his figures are accurate. But when people who were there and would have access to the numbers say no, it’s a red flag.



Who are these people with access to numbers who say it’s inaccurate? From what I see it’s creatives, and if we know anything from TSR history the company was run without any interaction between creative and sales.


----------



## QuentinGeorge (Jul 15, 2022)

Furthermore it lines up with the general gist of what Ryan Dancey claimed and he DID have access to sales data.


----------



## darjr (Jul 15, 2022)

Ryan Dancy has posted on Ben Rigggs Facebook about this and without any disagreement, I’d think he’d say something if he thought the numbers were off.

Also Stan! In an interview stated Basic sales numbers that match Bens.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 15, 2022)

brimmels said:


> I just answered this for two other people in this thread.



Lol. Those were both me. I was just being insistent. Thank you for that.


----------



## JLowder (Jul 15, 2022)

Jer said:


> Every time I read this kind of thing about TSR:
> 
> it gobsmacks me every single time.  Just - how? How could nobody in creative or sales think that maybe, just maybe, having a meeting to hash out the things that were selling and the things that weren't might be a good idea? I've never taken a business management class but it really seems like you wouldn't need to have one to think that seeing how product going out and money coming in might just be a good idea.




If design or editorial staff asked for sales numbers in the late 80s and early 90s, they were frequently stonewalled or flat-out told by upper management the numbers were not their concern. But then, most information at TSR was handled that way. Communication from upper management to staff was frequently condescending or openly hostile. If you raised business concerns that ran contrary to the company line in a meeting, you would often be dismissed by someone VP level and up saying the equivalent of "my sources tell me that's not a problem." This before you get to the pervasive atmosphere of paranoia, with the company afraid of too much information on sales or foreign language translations getting shared, because, for example, someone contractually owed payments for those works might question the official company accounting and threaten legal action.

There were exceptions. General sales figures were discussed and played a role in planning the fiction line. We had a better sense of sales in the Book Department because, in part, the writers received royalty reports, and that included several people in the building. We also had outside reports showing relative sales success in the fiction market, such as the data published in Locus magazine (which complained circa 1990 about TSR's fiction program having a "stranglehold" on the trade paperback market) and the various bestseller charts the TSR fiction releases regularly dominated in the 80s and early 90s.


----------



## Jer (Jul 15, 2022)

JLowder said:


> because, for example, someone contractually owed payments for those works might question the official company accounting and threaten legal action.



Thanks for the insight! This example has clarified a lot for me. While it still doesn't make sense to me that sales wouldn't be shared to set product direction, if they were engaged in broad scale cheating of folks on their payments the fewer people with the numbers who could figure that out the safer they'd be. And that extends to any financial shenanigans they might be engaged in.

The picture I've been putting together over the years makes it seem like the upper management was in seriously over their heads and they were more scared of anyone finding out how bad they were at their jobs or catching their malfeasance/misfeasance than they were of the company actually failing. Unsurprisingly it sounds like a lot of failed tech startups in that respect.


----------



## JLowder (Jul 15, 2022)

Jer said:


> Thanks for the insight! This example has clarified a lot for me. While it still doesn't make sense to me that sales wouldn't be shared to set product direction, if they were engaged in broad scale cheating of folks on their payments the fewer people with the numbers who could figure that out the safer they'd be. And that extends to any financial shenanigans they might be engaged in.
> 
> The picture I've been putting together over the years makes it seem like the upper management was in seriously over their heads and they were more scared of anyone finding out how bad they were at their jobs or catching their malfeasance/misfeasance than they were of the company actually failing. Unsurprisingly it sounds like a lot of failed tech startups in that respect.




It didn't have to be wholesale cheating or financial shenanigans. The company was paranoid about suits from Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, for example, and from other people who had been screwed over in various ways since the company launched. So they wanted to keep all information locked down, even if it was mundane. Some caution is always justified in business circles with trade secrets and sales data. TSR management took it to extremes. Not a shock. They were fast to threaten legal action against others and literally sent new staffers who might not be recognized to spy on Gary Gygax at Gen Con, so they expected the same in return. 

Management also feared creators finding out how successful their products were, as that might lead to them considering themselves more important than the brands. Creators who recognize their value demand better treatment, better contracts, and more money. So some publishers try not to let them know how many books they're selling or translation deals they have going. (You also fight to keep their names smaller on the covers than the logos. Or you keep the fiction author names off the spines of their books so the novels get shelved by series and not author. Keep the focus away from the creators.)

My take is that TSR management did not know how to work with creative people and Lorraine frequently hired VPs who saw the games, books, and magazines as widgets. They understood neither the products nor the market. Both problems are quite common with management for business ventures in the arts, and the hobby market is weirder and more difficult to navigate than average, even for the arts.


----------



## BenRiggs (Jul 15, 2022)

darjr said:


> @Michael Linke @Reynard
> His post was a mush mash of things, comments seemed mostly directed at others comments, and he criticized that other sales numbers that Ben intended to release, weren’t there, then he closed it as violating the Marketing rule.
> 
> It’s a public group and post.



Hey all! Ben Riggs, author of Slaying the Dragon here!

First off, Bruce Heard is an RPG legend. I'm flattered to even be in dialog with him.
Second, yep, my source for those sales numbers is anonymous. Which does bring up a fair question. How do I know those numbers are legit?
Well, because I not just interviewed dozens of TSR and WoTC alumni, but then sent my book to them for fact-checking before publication. People who were fine with the numbers included at least three TSR vice-presidents and the entire team that negotiated the sale of TSR except for Lorraine Williams, who wouldn't talk to me. I would highlight among that group Lisa Stevens, current publisher of Paizo, who was tasked with doing the financial autopsy of TSR after the fact. Everyone was on-board with those sales numbers.
In addition, because I became known as the guy writing a book on TSR, other people started sending me primary source material. No one sent me anything as comprehensive as my first source, but I was able to cross-check some numbers. For example, I have two primary sources that document the FR campaign set in 1994. So given the fact that eyewitnesses and multiple primary source documents are in agreement, I feel confident in releasing these numbers to the wild. 
Lastly, one of the serious flaws with TSR was the fact that creatives were not regularly informed of how their work was selling. (Author royalty statements would have sales numbers, but on the game side, royalties were not paid during the Williams era.) Sometimes designers would be told sales numbers, but that's it. 
Now if Bruce has some printed-out sales numbers from back in the day, I'd love to see them, but memories are tricky things. I really wish he'd enabled comments on that BECMI post! 
Be well everyone, and if you find this stuff interesting, consider buying my book!


----------



## QuentinGeorge (Jul 15, 2022)

James and Ben thanks for dropping by and adding your comments to the thread. You've both reinforced the point that in TSR it seems the creative minds behind the RPG products were not informed what was selling and what wasn't!


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 15, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Heard's rebuttal was irritating and cranky, didn't really further the conversation, and didn't really do a good job of rebutting anything. It would have been nice for a more respectful engagement of Rigg's statements with more clear clarifications from Heard's point of view without the unnecessary vitriol.
> 
> I have a lot of respect and love for Bruce Heard, as my main game back in the 80s and early 90s was "Basic" D&D and the Mystara campaign that went along with it. I'm impressed with his current work on the Calidar setting, a spiritual successor to Mystara. But Heard isn't doing much here other than throwing out cranky old designer energy.



To put myself in his shoes, someone is trying to release a tell-all expose about D&D in a world where we already have Game Wizards, claiming to have inside scoops from people who know stuff, and one of the few people kicking around who was there, and knows stuff, seems to have not been consulted.  I'd be dismissive too if someone wrote a tell-all expose about the Deli Counter of the Brick, NJ A&P circa 2003 and didn't even bother to get me as a source.


----------



## BenRiggs (Jul 15, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> To put myself in his shoes, someone is trying to release a tell-all expose about D&D in a world where we already have Game Wizards, claiming to have inside scoops from people who know stuff, and one of the few people kicking around who was there, and knows stuff, seems to have not been consulted.  I'd be dismissive too if someone wrote a tell-all expose about the Deli Counter of the Brick, NJ A&P circa 2003 and didn't even bother to get me as a source.



Have you read Game Wizards? One of the fantastic things for an audience is that Game Wizards focuses on the Gygax era at TSR. Less than a year later, my book's out, and it focuses on the Williams era at TSR. For an audience, it's an amazing coincidence because you get a detailed and complete history of TSR from birth to death, and you don't even have to wait a year between the two volumes.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 15, 2022)

BenRiggs said:


> Have you read Game Wizards? One of the fantastic things for an audience is that Game Wizards focuses on the Gygax era at TSR. Less than a year later, my book's out, and it focuses on the Williams era at TSR. For an audience, it's an amazing coincidence because you get a detailed and complete history of TSR from birth to death, and you don't even have to wait a year between the two volumes.



Aaaaaand purchased (audiobook). I wanted more after The Game Wizards.


----------



## BenRiggs (Jul 15, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Can @BenRiggs speak to whether the book should work well as an audiobook? I mean, I know he is going to say "yes, buy it!" but I am not asking _whether_ I should buy it, just if I _can_ buy it in audio and get the same value out of it.



I picked the narrator. I think he's top-notch. I think I tell a story about TSR, so it should be enjoyable in audio format.


----------



## Mezuka (Jul 15, 2022)

So, what happened in 1983-84. What caused the slump in sales?


----------



## Blue Orange (Jul 15, 2022)

Pretending I'm not a gamer for a second, it's interesting a defunct company from 20 years ago gathers so much ink. (Can you imagine this many books about Blockbuster in 10 years? Can you imagine people looking at sales figures for Radio Shack from the 80s, for all the importance it had to many tech people from that era?) Shows the emotional power and connection their products held over their fans, I think.


----------



## jacleg05 (Jul 16, 2022)

I have read a few books and articles about the mismanagement of TSR. I look forward to reading this one. Probably the history of TSR should be taught in business school to aspiring entrepreneurs.


----------



## Blue Orange (Jul 16, 2022)

jacleg05 said:


> I have read a few books and articles about the mismanagement of TSR. I look forward to reading this one. Probably the history of TSR should be taught in business school to aspiring entrepreneurs.




Particularly in the arts. There was incredible love for the product but it wasn't enough to save the company.


----------



## darjr (Jul 17, 2022)

Ooof!


----------



## darjr (Jul 18, 2022)

It was deleted. I’ll update if there is a change.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 18, 2022)

If the idea is to tell the STORY of late phase TSR, do we really need these numbers to understand that narrative?  Game Wizards did a great job of telling us the story of early TSR and the entire book had less "data" presented then even one of these stat dumps on facebook.  I'm hoping these numbers are just posted as supplementary info, and the book itself delivers on the story rather than the math.


----------



## Mannahnin (Jul 18, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> If the idea is to tell the STORY of late phase TSR, do we really need these numbers to understand that narrative?  Game Wizards did a great job of telling us the story of early TSR and the entire book had less "data" presented then even one of these stat dumps on facebook.  I'm hoping these numbers are just posted as supplementary info, and the book itself delivers on the story rather than the math.



Yes, that's what everyone who's read and reviewed it has indicated.  

The publisher didn't want to put a bunch of numbers and charts in, so Ben is sharing them on FB to stoke interest in us hardcore TSR history nerds.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 19, 2022)

It came out on audio today and I started listening on my long drive. I really like the narrator. Excellent hire. I am not deep enough to get a real sense of the meat but I will say I am glad I am familiar with The Game Wizards since so far anyway a lot of the details and nuance of early TSR and the development of D&D is given pretty shallow attention.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 19, 2022)

Well, i'd consider it a plus that he doesn't retread Game Wizards' ground.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 19, 2022)

I took a chance and ordered the hard cover.  I hope it's half as good as Game Wizards.


----------



## darjr (Jul 19, 2022)

Him and Jon Peterson have an association, if not an actual friendship, so I dint think it’s an accident the new book doesn’t rehab the other books details too much.


----------



## darjr (Jul 20, 2022)




----------



## Mannahnin (Jul 20, 2022)

My copy was waiting for me when I got home last night.


----------



## darjr (Jul 20, 2022)




----------



## Retreater (Jul 20, 2022)

My library has ordered the book, and I have it on hold. I'm excited to read it.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 21, 2022)

I am about halfway through the book and am a little put off by the prose. It's entirely too clever and purple in places, and the history is definitely more shallow that Peterson's work. I get that it is a different style of book (more of a pop history) so I am not faulting it for being what it is. Rather, I am just saying it isn't necessarily the follow up to The Game Wizards that I was hoping for. But I am also not not enjoying it for its own sake, and now that I have sort of settled in to what it is, I will enjoy it more, I think.


----------



## Micah Sweet (Jul 21, 2022)

Jer said:


> Every time I read this kind of thing about TSR:
> 
> it gobsmacks me every single time.  Just - how? How could nobody in creative or sales think that maybe, just maybe, having a meeting to hash out the things that were selling and the things that weren't might be a good idea? I've never taken a business management class but it really seems like you wouldn't need to have one to think that seeing how product going out and money coming in might just be a good idea.



In some ways, I'm glad they didn't.  So many products I loved would likely never had existed if TSR was a well-run company.  I absolutely loved the Encyclopedia Magica, for example.  The full set is still on my book shelf and regularly referenced.


----------



## Hussar (Jul 21, 2022)

Micah Sweet said:


> In some ways, I'm glad they didn't.  So many products I loved would likely never had existed if TSR was a well-run company.  I absolutely loved the Encyclopedia Magica, for example.  The full set is still on my book shelf and regularly referenced.



Of all the books I either sold or gave away over the years that I move (far, far too many times to keep carting around all these books) I deeply, deeply regret giving these away.  Those were just so many hours of reading.


----------



## Mannahnin (Jul 21, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I am about halfway through the book and am a little put off by the prose. It's entirely too clever and purple in places, and the history is definitely more shallow that Peterson's work. I get that it is a different style of book (more of a pop history) so I am not faulting it for being what it is. Rather, I am just saying it isn't necessarily the follow up to The Game Wizards that I was hoping for. But I am also not not enjoying it for its own sake, and now that I have sort of settled in to what it is, I will enjoy it more, I think.



Yeah, I'm in a similar place.  Got through part 1 yesterday and it's definitely lighter, breezier, and less rigorous and detailed than Peterson's work. 

On the other hand, Riggs' willingness to express a point of view is sometimes a welcome change, as when he calls out the evident dishonesty in Gary's later stories of events from the early 80s up to his own ouster.  And Riggs' willingness to relay stories which evidently come from personal interviews but aren't documented in contemporaneous documents means we get some more entertaining anecdotes about stuff like the Hollywood years. 

Overall I agree that one needs to enjoy it for its differences from Peterson's approach, rather than wishing it were more like his work.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 21, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> Yeah, I'm in a similar place.  Got through part 1 yesterday and it's definitely lighter, breezier, and less rigorous and detailed than Peterson's work.
> 
> On the other hand, Riggs' willingness to express a point of view is sometimes a welcome change, as when he calls out the evident dishonesty in Gary's later stories of events from the early 80s up to his own ouster.  And Riggs' willingness to relay stories which evidently come from personal interviews but aren't documented in contemporaneous documents means we get some more entertaining anecdotes about stuff like the Hollywood years.
> 
> Overall I agree that one needs to enjoy it for its differences from Peterson's approach, rather than wishing it were more like his work.



I do fear that those looking to paint it as something of a Gygax hit piece and William apology will find evidence in the text. I'm not saying that's what it is, but there are certainly passages that could be construed that way taken out of their larger context.


----------



## darjr (Jul 21, 2022)

Shawn Merwin has Benjamin Riggs in to talk about the secret history about the writing of the secrets history of Dungeons and Dragons 









						‎Mastering Dungeons: Mastering Dungeons – The Secret History of The Secret History of Dungeons & Dragons Author Ben Riggs on Apple Podcasts
					

‎Show Mastering Dungeons, Ep Mastering Dungeons – The Secret History of The Secret History of Dungeons & Dragons Author Ben Riggs - Jul 21, 2022



					podcasts.apple.com


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 21, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I do fear that those looking to paint it as something of a Gygax hit piece and William apology will find evidence in the text. I'm not saying that's what it is, but there are certainly passages that could be construed that way taken out of their larger context.



Even Game Wizards seemed to dispel the idea that Williams was the bad guy.  Williams comes on board having heard only Gary's side of the story.  After hearing everyone else's side of the story and seeing the company from the inside, she decides they're all blank-holes and figures she may as well save the company from all of them.  That's how I read the ending of Game Wizards, anyway.

Edit: so far, i think (hope) that Gary Gygax's involvement is just to get you up to speed if you didn't know the early history already.  The First Wizard/Last Dragon art makes it pretty clear this is a story about Lorraine and Peter, not a story about Gary and Lorraine.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 21, 2022)

darjr said:


> View attachment 254409



Glad to see i'm not the only one who takes the dust jacket off to read a hardcover.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 21, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I am about halfway through the book and am a little put off by the prose. It's entirely too clever and purple in places, and the history is definitely more shallow that Peterson's work. I get that it is a different style of book (more of a pop history) so I am not faulting it for being what it is. Rather, I am just saying it isn't necessarily the follow up to The Game Wizards that I was hoping for. But I am also not not enjoying it for its own sake, and now that I have sort of settled in to what it is, I will enjoy it more, I think.



I'm only on page 34.  So far, I have  to agree about the prose.  There are a few spots where he's clearly trying to be clever, and other spots where it looks like he just took bullet points from his outline, converted them into sentences, and called it a paragraph.  The paragraph beginning "Then there was the corkboard." at the top of page 30 was so dry I almost stopped reading.  The take on Mazes and Monsters two pages later as a foreshadowing of 9/11 was so bad I laughed, and so out of place in this book that I'm sure anyone reading this post who hasn't read the book is gonna think I'm making it up.

I'm holding out hope that the pre-williams era was tacked on to fill out word count, and that the real good stuff comes later.

But even if the whole book is this bad, the dude has proved that he can do the hardest part: finish a book.  Any issues with his writing style will iron themselves out as he writes more of them.


----------



## darjr (Jul 21, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Glad to see i'm not the only one who takes the dust jacket off to read a hardcover.



There are people who don’t?


----------



## Mannahnin (Jul 21, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> The take on Mazes and Monsters two pages later as a foreshadowing of 9/11 was so bad I laughed, and so out of place in this book that I'm sure anyone reading this post who hasn't read the book is gonna think I'm making it up.



Yeah, that was honestly terrible.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 21, 2022)

darjr said:


> There are people who don’t?



Some of us even use the dust jacket as a bookmark! Mwahahaha


----------



## Reynard (Jul 21, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> The First Wizard/Last Dragon art makes it pretty clear this is a story about Lorraine and Peter, not a story about Gary and Lorraine.



That is a strange take on that imagery. I don't know how you could see First Wizard-Last Dragon and not think Gygax-Williams in this context.


----------



## darjr (Jul 21, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Some of us even use the dust jacket as a bookmark! Mwahahaha



I’m surrounded by heathens!

Actually I kinda like that.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 21, 2022)

Reynard said:


> That is a strange take on that imagery. I don't know how you could see First Wizard-Last Dragon and not think Gygax-Williams in this context.



1. He's holding Magic cards.
2. He looks like Adkison.
3. He doesn't look like Gary.


----------



## Reynard (Jul 21, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> 1. He's holding Magic cards.
> 2. He looks like Adkison.
> 3. He doesn't look like Gary.
> 
> View attachment 254604



Oh, lol, I thought you meant imagery -- First Wizard, Last Dragon, not an actual image


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 21, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Oh, lol, I thought you meant imagery -- First Wizard, Last Dragon, not an actual image



I won't repost it since it's already in the thread.  See darjr's photo of the title page.


----------



## Willie the Duck (Jul 21, 2022)

Blue Orange said:


> Pretending I'm not a gamer for a second, it's interesting a defunct company from 20 years ago gathers so much ink. (Can you imagine this many books about Blockbuster in 10 years? Can you imagine people looking at sales figures for Radio Shack from the 80s, for all the importance it had to many tech people from that era?) Shows the emotional power and connection their products held over their fans, I think.



Hadn't seen this before. I think that probably these things exist, just not in as direct a form. The end of Blockbuster is probably included in a lot of textbooks for Communications, Media Studies, and Entertainment Industry classes and degrees. Individual companies like Radio Shack maybe less so, but I bet a lot of books about economic development in the 80s (and there are a grip of those, as in economic circles people never get tired of rehashing old battles) cover the company. Further afield, I read the memoir of Minnesota Governor Elmer Anderson, and the book contains a huge amount of information about the H B Fuller company in the '40s through '70s. I imagine there are similar situations across every industry.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 21, 2022)

Willie the Duck said:


> Hadn't seen this before. I think that probably these things exist, just not in as direct a form. The end of Blockbuster is probably included in a lot of textbooks for Communications, Media Studies, and Entertainment Industry classes and degrees. Individual companies like Radio Shack maybe less so, but I bet a lot of books about economic development in the 80s (and there are a grip of those, as in economic circles people never get tired of rehashing old battles) cover the company. Further afield, I read the memoir of Minnesota Governor Elmer Anderson, and the book contains a huge amount of information about the H B Fuller company in the '40s through '70s. I imagine there are similar situations across every industry.



The Last Blockbuster is a pretty good documentary.  I don't want to throw shade at Jon Peterson or Ben Riggs, but I think more people have streamed Last Blockbuster than will ever read Game Wizards and Slaying the Dragon combined.


----------



## darjr (Jul 21, 2022)




----------



## darjr (Jul 22, 2022)




----------



## Reynard (Jul 23, 2022)

Man, the fact that Williams left Middle Earth sitting on the table is astounding.


----------



## Mannahnin (Jul 25, 2022)

Finished the book Saturday night.  It was a good read, and either I got more used to Ben's prose idiosyncrasies, or they improved as the book went on (although his continual lauding of dozens of people as "geniuses" was a bit over the top throughout).

The latter half definitely had a lot of interesting stuff, and some significant new details I wasn't familiar with already, like the details of TSR West and its debacle, including the full story of how they screwed up the DC relationship.


----------



## el-remmen (Jul 25, 2022)

My copy arrives today. The charts had me teetering on ordering it, but [the Weiss] excerpt sealed the deal (well that and my mom sending me some money to buy myself a gift for my birthday).


Edit: I just realized I managed to put this post in the wrong thread - though it is the same general topic.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 25, 2022)

Heh, in case nobody noticed...

Reviewed by WIRED


----------



## Parmandur (Jul 25, 2022)

Jer said:


> Every time I read this kind of thing about TSR:
> 
> it gobsmacks me every single time.  Just - how? How could nobody in creative or sales think that maybe, just maybe, having a meeting to hash out the things that were selling and the things that weren't might be a good idea? I've never taken a business management class but it really seems like you wouldn't need to have one to think that seeing how product going out and money coming in might just be a good idea.



That was what fhe WotC people thought when they took over and started due diligence work.


----------



## darjr (Jul 27, 2022)

Ben Riggs is interviewed on the GenCon channel and I have to say it's super interesting and almost surreal to watch Peter Adkison while Ben is talking. Peter is the former CEO of WotC who bought TSR. Also there are more hints on what his next book will be about.

The link is at the time stamp it starts.


----------



## darjr (Jul 27, 2022)

Posting this here for reference 








						TSR - Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
					

In the winter of 1997, I traveled to Lake Geneva Wisconsin on a  secret  mission. In the late fall, rumors of TSR's impending bankruptcy had created an opportunity to made a bold gamble that the business could  be  saved by an infusion of capital or an acquisition with a larger  partner. After a...




					www.enworld.org
				




Oh and this. Gary QA








						TSR - Q&A with Gary Gygax
					

This is the multi-year Q&A sessions held by D&D co-creator Gary Gygax here at EN World, beginning in 2002 and running up until his sad pasing in 2008. Gary's username in the thread below is Col_Pladoh, and his first post in this long thread is Post #39.




					www.enworld.org


----------



## darjr (Jul 31, 2022)

Just finished it. Perusing the Acknowledgments is even incredible!


----------



## Parmandur (Jul 31, 2022)

Just listened to the audiovook. Fascinating stuff, really illustrates.the perfect storm that TSR management reaped.


----------



## darjr (Aug 1, 2022)

Ben has three seminars at GenCon. Very interesting. Looks like some bit of preview for his next book? OGL?

He said they’ll be made available later.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 1, 2022)

darjr said:


> Ben has three seminars at GenCon. Very interesting. Looks like some bit of preview for his next book? OGL?
> 
> He said they’ll be made available later.
> 
> View attachment 255985



Based on the interviews from Slaying the Dragon, he certainly has the info to make a book about early WotC D&D.

Weirdly, I really look forward to in twenty years getting the real deal inside details for the 5E era.


----------



## darjr (Aug 1, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Based on the interviews from Slaying the Dragon, he certainly has the info to make a book about early WotC D&D.
> 
> Weirdly, I really look forward to in twenty years getting the real deal inside details for the 5E era.



You might not have to wait that long…..


----------



## Paul Westermeyer (Aug 1, 2022)

BenRiggs said:


> Second, yep, my source for those sales numbers is anonymous. Which does bring up a fair question. How do I know those numbers are legit?



That's not how historians do their work. It's fine for journalism, I believe (I'm a historian, not a journalist) but historians are required show their work, where it came from. It needs to be work that can be replicated by other historians.  It doesn't matter that you have anecdotal evidence that says "these numbers look right", they are not verified nor are they verifiable.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 1, 2022)

Paul Westermeyer said:


> That's not how historians do their work. It's fine for journalism, I believe (I'm a historian, not a journalist) but historians are required show their work, where it came from. It needs to be work that can be replicated by other historians.  It doesn't matter that you have anecdotal evidence that says "these numbers look right", there are not verified nor are they verifiable.



This book is a journalistic, and frankly fairly casual and conversational, piece of work. Protecting sources is an important part of journalistic ethics.


----------



## Micah Sweet (Aug 1, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> This book is a journalistic, and frankly fairly casual and conversational, piece of work. Protecting sources is an important part of journalistic ethics.



Perhaps it shouldn't be titled as a history then, but rather an exposè.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 1, 2022)

Micah Sweet said:


> Perhaps it shouldn't be titled as a history then, but rather an exposè.



Yeah, having listened to the whole thing thst is about right. There is some wild stuff in there, like about the Gygax cocaine and hooker situation in L.A., or how WotC had to clean up a sexual abuse mess when they took over.


----------



## billd91 (Aug 1, 2022)

Paul Westermeyer said:


> That's not how historians do their work. It's fine for journalism, I believe (I'm a historian, not a journalist) but historians are required show their work, where it came from. It needs to be work that can be replicated by other historians.  It doesn't matter that you have anecdotal evidence that says "these numbers look right", they are not verified nor are they verifiable.



This is one of the challenges of working with relatively contemporary events and situations combined with informants who may be subject to retaliation for giving the writer information. Ethics requires the need for transparency and verifiability to take a back seat to the security of the informant.


----------



## Paul Westermeyer (Aug 1, 2022)

This story isn't "contemporary", I've written history on much more serious matters that have happened as recently, even more recently, then the tales in this work. I've had to deal with sources whose lives and the lives of their families would likely be in danger if handled poorly. You still don't use anonymous sources.  Certainly not without a great deal of caveating and context. And you don't justify it by anecdotal comments form a few concerned witnesses.


----------



## darjr (Aug 1, 2022)

Paul Westermeyer said:


> This story isn't "contemporary", I've written history on much more serious matters that have happened as recently, even more recently, then the tales in this work. I've had to deal with sources whose lives and the lives of their families would likely be in danger if handled poorly. You still don't use anonymous sources.  Certainly not without a great deal of caveating and context. And you don't justify it by anecdotal comments form a few concerned witnesses.



Note that most of these numbers are not in the book. Ben and the publisher decided against putting them in.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 1, 2022)

darjr said:


> Note that most of these numbers are not in the book. Ben and the publisher decided against putting them in.



Yeah, putting the numbers out is just drumming up conversation: the book relys on interviews on the record.


----------



## David Howery (Aug 16, 2022)

finished this book yesterday.  The contrast between the somber tone of William's tenure and Adkinson's rescue is extreme.  It kinda goggles the mind that WOTC was so well placed with huge stacks of cash to rescue D&D from the creditors, as well as very eager to do so.  And his complete turnaround on how the upper management was going to respect and work with the creative people was a treat to read.  I particularly liked the story about how he unlocked the art deposit room and told all the artists to take their works, no questions.  Riggs' point that Williams, no matter what she did during her tenure at TSR, ultimately saved the game by going forward with the sale to WOTC, who were well placed and enthusiastic about actually working on D&D.  And the simple but effective payout to Gygax and Arneson to both heal the wounds and get them out of the process was something TSR could have done long before that.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Aug 17, 2022)

David Howery said:


> finished this book yesterday.  The contrast between the somber tone of William's tenure and Adkinson's rescue is extreme.  It kinda goggles the mind that WOTC was so well placed with huge stacks of cash to rescue D&D from the creditors, as well as very eager to do so.  And his complete turnaround on how the upper management was going to respect and work with the creative people was a treat to read.  I particularly liked the story about how he unlocked the art deposit room and told all the artists to take their works, no questions.  Riggs' point that Williams, no matter what she did during her tenure at TSR, ultimately saved the game by going forward with the sale to WOTC, who were well placed and enthusiastic about actually working on D&D.  And the simple but effective payout to Gygax and Arneson to both heal the wounds and get them out of the process was something TSR could have done long before that.



Peter Adkinson always seemed like a pretty class act overall. I know little about the guy, but he certainly has seemed both business savvy and principled.


----------



## David Howery (Aug 17, 2022)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> Peter Adkinson always seemed like a pretty class act overall. I know little about the guy, but he certainly has seemed both business savvy and principled.



I think the book said something about him and Stevens having business degrees of some kind.....


----------



## Michael Linke (Aug 19, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> Finished the book Saturday night.  It was a good read, and either I got more used to Ben's prose idiosyncrasies, or they improved as the book went on (although his continual lauding of dozens of people as "geniuses" was a bit over the top throughout).
> 
> The latter half definitely had a lot of interesting stuff, and some significant new details I wasn't familiar with already, like the details of TSR West and its debacle, including the full story of how they screwed up the DC relationship.



Most of his prose is ok.  From reading it, i get the sense it's a stack of essays he worked on one at a time.  The seams between his writing sessions are obvious.  Maybe we should blame his editor, and not the author, as there seems to be no work done to make this into a single cohesive narrative.  By the end of a chapter i feel like I've reached the end of a story, and maybe don't need to bother starting up the next chapter.  

There are even these little faux endings within chapters before transitioning to different subtopics.  He really hammers stuff home, like the "comic modules are not comic books" joke, as if it's gonna be his only chance to talk about it, but repeats the gag in his next essay on the topic, in a way that to me reads as if he's not sure his prior reference is gonna make it into the final version of the book.

I really don't think this is a great execution. He picked a good topic, so I've put up with his writing, and even if this execution was bad, he's proven he _can_ write, and I'm very sure his third book will be AMAZING.


----------



## Michael Linke (Aug 19, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> This book is a journalistic, and frankly fairly casual and conversational, piece of work. Protecting sources is an important part of journalistic ethics.



But the author has a clear voice.  He refers to himself in the first person.  I haven't seen much journalism that's so personal.  I don't know what this.  It's not terrible.  it's not great.  I'm gonna finish it.  I care about the topic.  But how it's executed is really making it hard on me.

Edit: It's an opinion piece, and at times it's almost an autobiography of his time spent researching the topic.  There's too much of his own opinion for this to qualify as history or journalism.

Edit: Exposé may be the best description I've seen on this thread.


----------



## Parmandur (Aug 19, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> But the author has a clear voice.  He refers to himself in the first person.  I haven't seen much journalism that's so personal.  I don't know what this.  It's not terrible.  it's not great.  I'm gonna finish it.  I care about the topic.  But how it's executed is really making it hard on me.
> 
> Edit: It's an opinion piece, and at times it's almost an autobiography of his time spent researching the topic.  There's too much of his own opinion for this to qualify as history or journalism.
> 
> Edit: Exposé may be the best description I've seen on this thread.



It's a certain style, kind of old school.


----------



## darjr (Aug 19, 2022)

I really like Bens style. I can almost hear his voice when reading it. I’m now listening to the audio version and the reader is good!


----------



## Reynard (Aug 19, 2022)

darjr said:


> I really like Bens style. I can almost hear his voice when reading it. I’m now listening to the audio version and the reader is good!



I really think the narrator of the audiobook elevates some otherwise middling prose.


----------



## Alzrius (Aug 19, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> But the author has a clear voice.  He refers to himself in the first person.  I haven't seen much journalism that's so personal.  I don't know what this.  It's not terrible.  it's not great.  I'm gonna finish it.  I care about the topic.  But how it's executed is really making it hard on me.
> 
> Edit: It's an opinion piece, and at times it's almost an autobiography of his time spent researching the topic.  There's too much of his own opinion for this to qualify as history or journalism.
> 
> Edit: Exposé may be the best description I've seen on this thread.



I think the use of the term "journalism" runs into the limits of our contemporary vernacular. There's "journalism" like what you find in the New York Times, and there's "journalism" like what you find on a site like Geek Native (which Riggs used to write for). It's not inaccurate to say that the former has elevated standards for how an article is written compared to the latter, even if they could both be called journalistic outfits.


----------



## Retreater (Sep 9, 2022)

I finished reading this last night, which is a little late to the party because I waited to check it out from my local library.
The quick review: I liked the book, and it made me better appreciate what WotC did for D&D (and the entire hobby). It also made me nostalgic for those 2e settings I never owned myself (Planescape and Dark Sun especially) because I was one of those "setting fans" they described in the book. (FYI mine was Ravenloft.)


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 9, 2022)

I still have issues with Riggs’ style in the book, but he picked a really good story.  If he follows through with his next book, which he suggests in the afterword will be about the creation of 3e, d20 and the OGL, I’ll be excited to see if his own skill as a writer can rise to the level of his skill as a storyteller.

One thing that really confused me is when he talks about the Random House loan agreement.  He keeps talking about it like it’s a secret he unearthed, that nobody knows about, but I’m certain it was described in Peteron’s Game Wizards.


----------



## Retreater (Sep 9, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> One thing that really confused me is when he talks about the Random House loan agreement. He keeps talking about it like it’s a secret he unearthed, that nobody knows about, but I’m certain it was described in Peteron’s Game Wizards.



I think Game Wizards was published in Oct 2021. If that's the case, Riggs' research was certainly completed before that time, and likely it had been sent to editing and publication by Oct 2021. So it could've been news to him as he was writing Slaying the Dragon.


----------



## darjr (Sep 9, 2022)

I think it was kinda known, but the first time I heard about it was a talk Ben actually gave a few years ago. I remember his claim and thinking “wait? We already knew this” but I was just remembering his talk and I had forgotten it was he who gave it.


----------



## Parmandur (Sep 9, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> I still have issues with Riggs’ style in the book, but he picked a really good story.  If he follows through with his next book, which he suggests in the afterword will be about the creation of 3e, d20 and the OGL, I’ll be excited to see if his own skill as a writer can rise to the level of his skill as a storyteller.
> 
> One thing that really confused me is when he talks about the Random House loan agreement.  He keeps talking about it like it’s a secret he unearthed, that nobody knows about, but I’m certain it was described in Peteron’s Game Wizards.



Riggs has been writing and speaking about this for years, but he brought it to light in some articles originally. Thisnis the premiere in published book form, though.


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 13, 2022)

Yeah, major details of the Random House arrangement DID come out a few years back, so those of us who are D&D history junkies were definitely already aware of it and had been for years before this book.  So that note rang a bit false, though I'm sure for many readers it's their first time hearing about it.


----------



## GreyLord (Sep 13, 2022)

Wait, people are thinking that the Random House news is NEW?!  Or just discovered?

It's been known for decades at this point (or so I thought).  

Perhaps what is changing is that instead of listening to Dancey's singular statement (among several, but only one is what people normally focus on) people are actually realizing there were bona fide BAD financial and business decisions that caused serious problems for TSR other than the often repeated line that it was splitting the lines that caused problems (which somehow turned into people blaming it for ALL the problems with TSR's finances and end).

I've stated that it wasn't splitting the lines per se, but BAD business decisions that caused the financial troubles, though I focus primarily on those that spent more on the production and took less money in rather than JUST the Random House deal.


----------



## Micah Sweet (Sep 13, 2022)

GreyLord said:


> Wait, people are thinking that the Random House news is NEW?!  Or just discovered?
> 
> It's been known for decades at this point (or so I thought).
> 
> ...



For the record, I'm glad TSR was run so poorly.  Most of what I love about D&D would never have existed if TSR was a better run company.


----------



## darjr (Sep 13, 2022)

Micah Sweet said:


> For the record, I'm glad TSR was run so poorly.  Most of what I love about D&D would never have existed if TSR was a better run company.



I do think that a lot of wonderful things we love are happy accidents. In one way or another. Star Wars being an example, and some of the things from TSR being another.


----------



## darjr (Sep 13, 2022)

GreyLord said:


> Wait, people are thinking that the Random House news is NEW?!  Or just discovered?
> 
> It's been known for decades at this point (or so I thought).
> 
> ...



Not in its entirety no, not I anyway.


----------



## Reynard (Sep 13, 2022)

I feel like folks are not remembering what they did or didn't know. If only there was some way to look into the past and find out...


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 13, 2022)

GreyLord said:


> Wait, people are thinking that the Random House news is NEW?!  Or just discovered?
> 
> It's been known for decades at this point (or so I thought).



Can you maybe link to the furthest-back written source you can find talking about the Random House printing/payment deal?

My recollection is that it only started to become common knowledge (in our rarified D&D nerd circles, anyway) in relatively recent years.  Maybe going back as far as 2012, when Playing at the World came out, perhaps?


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 13, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> Can you maybe link to the furthest-back written source you can find talking about the Random House printing/payment deal?



I seem to recall that it was expressly discussed in _30 Years of Adventure_, which WotC published back in 2004, but I'd need to go back and double-check just to be sure.


----------



## darjr (Sep 13, 2022)

So here is an early reference to Random House and the financial issue in the following thread.

Note it hints at an earlier reference 









						What if. . .WotC never bought TSR?
					

It was when the DFT withdraw its support that TSR's decline became a collapse.  Hmmm, I hadn't heard that part.  The story, as I had read it (and this was probably from a Ryan Dancey post back on Eric Noah's site) was that Random House (which distributed TSR products to stores like B. Dalton and...




					www.enworld.org


----------



## darjr (Sep 13, 2022)

Some key things in that thread I think that people didn’t know are the details of the loans and amounts and the fact that D&D ip, divided up in awkward chunks, was set up as collateral to cover debts (thiught not to random house specifically, I think)


----------



## darjr (Sep 13, 2022)

And here is Ryan Dancy, most of the issue with Random House is spelled out except for details. I will note that he does mention IP as collateral but not what and to what extent.  From 2000. 

TSR - Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR

Digging out a quote, more than I remember is there.



> And I read the details of the Random House distribution agreement; an agreement that TSR had used to support a failing business and hide the fact that TSR was rotten at the core. I read the entangling bank agreements that divided the copyright interests of the company as security against default, and realized that the desperate arrangements made to shore up the company's poor financial picture had so contaminated those rights that it might not be possible to extract Dungeons & Dragons from the clutches of lawyers and bankers and courts for years upon end. I read the severance agreements between the company and departed executives which paid them extraordinary sums for their silence.


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> And here is Rean Dancy, most of the issue with Random House is spelled out except for details. I will note that he does mention IP as collateral but not what and to what extent.  From 2000.
> 
> TSR - Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
> 
> Digging out a quote, more than I remember is there.



Right, but this only hints at it, it doesn't give any of the real details.

Like in _Slaying the Dragon_, Riggs talks explicitly about the contract's origins and WHY TSR entered into it in the first place, back in 1980 or whenever it was (blanking on the exact year).  When they needed advance funding to keep printing new expensive fancy hardcovers while still printing the back catalogue of fancy expensive hardcovers (among cheaper supplements).  At the time it made perfect sense to make that deal to get the cash flow they needed, and it made sense for Random House to give them that cash to make sure the products kept flowing, while sales numbers kept climbing through the roof.  Both parties wanted those sales, for production to be able to keep up with demand.

It wasn't until around midway through the Williams years, it seems, that TSR started misusing the deal to pump a firehose of product out to cover their core operating expenses, not just to print books that WOULD sell.  And while Ryan Dancy writes "_the Random House distribution agreement; an agreement that TSR had used to support a failing business and hide the fact that TSR was rotten at the core_" that doesn't really give any details of what the deal did, how it provided that operating cash, or the fact that the deal itself long predated the management regime that misused it.  When I read that paragraph originally I inferred that it was some deal late-era TSR struck on bad terms to try to stay afloat.

But fair point to GreyLord that this is Dancy referencing the Random House Distribution Agreement decades ago.  I'm now trying to remember when the actual details first become widely known.  Maybe Alzrius is right that it was _30 Years of Adventure_, though I'd be a little surprised if an official WotC publication of that period were really candid about the nature of that contract.


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 13, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> I seem to recall that it was expressly discussed in _30 Years of Adventure_, which WotC published back in 2004, but I'd need to go back and double-check just to be sure.



Okay, looking back through it, _30 Years of Adventure_ does indeed go into greater detail. Starting on page 214:



> Nineteen-ninety six was a very strange year for TSR. From a financial point of view 1996 was the best sales year in the history of the company with over $40 million in sales. Unfortunately, in spite of these huge sales, TSR ended up losing money, and losing big.
> 
> To understand how this happened it's necessary to understand TSR's relationship with the book trade. TSR sold (and now, as part of WotC, continues to sell) a large percentage of their books through stores like B. Dalton and Waldenbooks. All of these sales were managed by a distributor and publisher, Random House. The contract between TSR and Random House required very careful management or it could backfire.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> So here is an early reference to Random House and the financial issue in the following thread.
> 
> Note it hints at an earlier reference
> 
> ...






Alzrius said:


> Okay, looking back through it, _30 Years of Adventure_ does indeed go into greater detail. Starting on page 214:



Ok, that looks like a bingo.  

Nice job, gents, and a hat tip to GreyLord, who was closer than I thought.  

_30 Years of Adventure_ released 2004 gives us more substantive details outlining the Random House deal and its consequences, and then we've got a 2005 thread including it as a known factor in a speculative "What If" discussion of what might have happened if WotC hadn't bought TSR.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 13, 2022)

Micah Sweet said:


> For the record, I'm glad TSR was run so poorly.  Most of what I love about D&D would never have existed if TSR was a better run company.



TSR had to die so that D&D could live.  If TSR was a better run company, particularly if it didn’t create all those unprofitable campaign settings, D&D would not be even remotely as loved and popular as it is today.

Someone had to go out of business showing the world that D&D was truly infinite.  There’s no world in which TSR survives and operates profitably while D&D also comes even close to its present popularity.


----------



## darjr (Sep 13, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> TSR had to die so that D&D could live.  If TSR was a better run company, particularly if it didn’t create all those unprofitable campaign settings, D&D would not be even remotely as loved and popular as it is today.
> 
> Someone had to go out of business showing the world that D&D was truly infinite.  There’s no world in which TSR survives and operates profitably while D&D also comes even close to its present popularity.



Pure speculation. I mean if you’re going to go this far out on a limb what prevents a successful TSR and D&D?


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 13, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Someone had to go out of business showing the world that D&D was truly infinite.  There’s no world in which TSR survives and operates profitably while D&D also comes even close to its present popularity.



There is zero basis for any of these claims. Wizards "saved" D&D by being a competent gaming company, who made decisions using data and analysis. The very same decisions could have been made by TSR if they were only more competent.


----------



## Iosue (Sep 14, 2022)

I'll also point out that when TSR was at its most profligate with settings was also the time the World of Darkness books, particularly Vampire: The Masquerade, were vying with it for shelf space.

Also, I'm not entirely sure the majority of current 5e players even remember 90s TSR, if they were actually born at the time.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 14, 2022)

And, given the sales data we have for these settings from the book and from stuff Ben has posted here and elsewhere, I'm not sure that most of those settings have even been more than glanced at by the overwhelming majority of gamers even from those days.  How many people ACTUALLY read a Spelljammer book?  I know I didn't.  I heard about it.  Saw a few bits and bobs in Dragon and maybe a Monster Manual entry or two, but, actually see anything from the setting?  Nope.

For me, settings have never really defined D&D.  I was a homebrewer until 3e.  Dark Sun?  Never picked up a book.  Ravenloft?  Played the old original module when it came out, never looked at it again.  Mystara?  Only knew about it from the Voyages of the Princess Ark stories in Dragon.  So on and so forth.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> Pure speculation. I mean if you’re going to go this far out on a limb what prevents a successful TSR and D&D?



For TSR to have been successful, it must not have produced any of the campaign settings we loved them for beyond a single flagship line.  For TSR to have been successful, it must not have supported D&D and AD&D in parallel, with vastly different tone and scope between the two variants.  The cost/price balance of individual products was way out of whack.  The products a successful TSR would have put out would have been far more expensive, or had far poorer production values than we remembered.

D&D's legacy was forged by suicidal adherence to an unsustainable business plan.  I don't think any sustainable business plan would have created a D&D nearly as memorable and culturally significant as what we got leading up to the late 90s.  D&D would not have been the brand that it is if those mistakes weren't made.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 14, 2022)

Iosue said:


> I'll also point out that when TSR was at its most profligate with settings was also the time the World of Darkness books, particularly Vampire: The Masquerade, were vying with it for shelf space.
> 
> Also, I'm not entirely sure the majority of current 5e players even remember 90s TSR, if they were actually born at the time.



They may not remember, but their understanding of 5e is definitely helped by the wealth of Greyhawk and FR material from that era, not to mention the recent and upcoming revivals of Spelljammer and Dragonlance.

All of this is just, like, my opinion, man.


----------



## Micah Sweet (Sep 14, 2022)

Hussar said:


> And, given the sales data we have for these settings from the book and from stuff Ben has posted here and elsewhere, I'm not sure that most of those settings have even been more than glanced at by the overwhelming majority of gamers even from those days.  How many people ACTUALLY read a Spelljammer book?  I know I didn't.  I heard about it.  Saw a few bits and bobs in Dragon and maybe a Monster Manual entry or two, but, actually see anything from the setting?  Nope.
> 
> For me, settings have never really defined D&D.  I was a homebrewer until 3e.  Dark Sun?  Never picked up a book.  Ravenloft?  Played the old original module when it came out, never looked at it again.  Mystara?  Only knew about it from the Voyages of the Princess Ark stories in Dragon.  So on and so forth.



I continue to be fascinated by how opposite our gaming histories have been, despite starting in a similar time frame.  Big tent indeed.


----------



## Micah Sweet (Sep 14, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> For TSR to have been successful, it must not have produced any of the campaign settings we loved them for beyond a single flagship line.  For TSR to have been successful, it must not have supported D&D and AD&D in parallel, with vastly different tone and scope between the two variants.  The cost/price balance of individual products was way out of whack.  The products a successful TSR would have put out would have been far more expensive, or had far poorer production values than we remembered.
> 
> D&D's legacy was forged by suicidal adherence to an unsustainable business plan.  I don't think any sustainable business plan would have created a D&D nearly as memorable and culturally significant as what we got leading up to the late 90s.  D&D would not have been the brand that it is if those mistakes weren't made.



And that's why I loved them.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 14, 2022)

Hussar said:


> And, given the sales data we have for these settings from the book and from stuff Ben has posted here and elsewhere, I'm not sure that most of those settings have even been more than glanced at by the overwhelming majority of gamers even from those days.  How many people ACTUALLY read a Spelljammer book?  I know I didn't.  I heard about it.  Saw a few bits and bobs in Dragon and maybe a Monster Manual entry or two, but, actually see anything from the setting?  Nope.
> 
> For me, settings have never really defined D&D.  I was a homebrewer until 3e.  Dark Sun?  Never picked up a book.  Ravenloft?  Played the old original module when it came out, never looked at it again.  Mystara?  Only knew about it from the Voyages of the Princess Ark stories in Dragon.  So on and so forth.



My first D&D product was the Troy Denning Black Box.  A few years later, someone gave my the Yellow AD&D starter set, with the dragon art reused from the Denning box.  From there, i purchased 3! campaign settings (Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Revised Dark Sun) before moving on to purchase a single AD&D rulebook.  The rules were interesting, but they didn't capture the imagination.  The assurance that you could do anything with them was interesting, but it took seeing Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun and Ravenfloft side by side on a shelf to realize "Oh, wait, they don't mean 'from Tolkien to Greek Mythology', they mean like _everything_ everything."

The post mortem on the campaign settings in Slaying the Dragon wasn't that nobody bought them, or that nobody cared about them, just that they weren't broadening the customer base.  For me, at least, I wasn't a single genre person who would say "Wow.  Ravenloft.  I MUST play D&D so that I can use this Ravenloft stuff."  The breadth of settings available was THE selling point for me.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Sep 14, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> Okay, looking back through it, _30 Years of Adventure_ does indeed go into greater detail. Starting on page 214:



Yeah, this is pretty much how I remember it, VERY soon after TSR went under it was known that they had been doing SOME sort of deal with Random House. I'm not even sure it was really exactly a big secret back in the days when they were doing well. Companies like Random House do this stuff, they pay to have books produced all the time. It just isn't that weird at all.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 14, 2022)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> Yeah, this is pretty much how I remember it, VERY soon after TSR went under it was known that they had been doing SOME sort of deal with Random House. I'm not even sure it was really exactly a big secret back in the days when they were doing well. Companies like Random House do this stuff, they pay to have books produced all the time. It just isn't that weird at all.



It was a weird thing for a hobby/games company to do at the time Gygax-era TSR made the deal, but not weird for other types of companies that would have done business with Random House.  Benn Riggs did a good enough job explaining the perfect storm of Factoring, the loan scheme and poor understanding of the market.


----------



## David Howery (Sep 14, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> One thing that really confused me is when he talks about the Random House loan agreement. He keeps talking about it like it’s a secret he unearthed, that nobody knows about, but I’m certain it was described in Peteron’s Game Wizards.



it was news to me, as I generally didn't read some of the odd sources it was noted in before.  I had long had the vague idea that TSR was sunk by a combo of generally poor sales, high production costs, and the final nail being the failure of Dragon Dice.  StD makes it clear that it was actually the Random House contract....


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 14, 2022)

David Howery said:


> it was news to me, as I generally didn't read some of the odd sources it was noted in before.  I had long had the vague idea that TSR was sunk by a combo of generally poor sales, high production costs, and the final nail being the failure of Dragon Dice.  StD makes it clear that it was actually the Random House contract....



Or rather the final consequences of misusing the Random House contract as a way to print money/take advances to cover expenses that money should never have been used for. 

That agreement was great and useful when it was being used to fund printing stuff that actually sold. To meet demand.

When they abandoned tracking sales numbers and production costs (as it seems) they started throwing good money after bad and tanked their profitability.  And using the "get paid up front for what we print & ship, regardless of whether it actually sells, but unsold stuff can eventually be returned to us with a demand for reimbursement" agreement was patching over a hull breach with a band-aid. 

You were right that poor sales (of individual products) and high production costs were more fundamental issues.  The RH agreement just gave TSR a source of cash to let them ignore those errors for a while, and then dealt the death blow when RH finally decided to call in the debt/return unsold stuff.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Sep 14, 2022)

Im about halfway through and the author mocking keeps referring to Gary G as “Saint Gary” which seems pretty dickish.  It was fine in the chapter about how Gary perceived himself and/or related past event from his POV, but for the author to keep hammering on it later just seems petty.

Other wise I’m loving it... aside from the weird 9/11 / Mazes and Monsters connection.  Talk about a stretch.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Sep 15, 2022)

Reading about Adkison and how he was a big ol geek who lived his dream to own TSR/D&D.... and then he sold it all to Hasbro and quit within a year.  Hilarious.

And while I can appreciate that Lorraine Williams "saved" TSR according to this book she ran it straight into the ground.  While Gygax may have been a fantastic gamer but a lousy business owner, She was neither good with games or running a business.


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 15, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Reading about Adkison and how he was a big ol geek who lived his dream to own TSR/D&D.... and then he sold it all to Hasbro and quit.  Hilarious.



Posts like this always remind me of what Rick Marshall, who (as I understand it) was close to many of the people working at WotC in the company's early days and stayed in touch with them later, had to say about why Adkison sold the company (in the comments below the article):



> There are two main reasons.
> 
> First, the truth is that the company was thriving, but the principals weren't. Everyone went deeply into debt to launch Wizards, and further to try to survive through the lean times of the lawsuit. Magic: The Gathering almost didn't happen at all. Friends and family teamed up to help people make rent and car payments to they wouldn't go bankrupt before the game could be released. We thought Magic was a blast to play, and the art for it looked gorgeous, so we hoped everyone would like it, but we didn't really know. It was an enormous gamble, and everyone put everything on the line.
> 
> ...


----------



## DarkCrisis (Sep 15, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> Posts like this always remind me of what Rick Marshall, who (as I understand it) was close to many of the people working at WotC in the company's early days and stayed in touch with them later, had to say about why Adkison sold the company (in the comments below the article):



Cant fault him for health reasons.  Just funny for the book to hype him up so much and then learning it lasted all of about a year or so.

D&D back in the hands of gamers that valued talent!...... HASBRO.


----------



## darjr (Sep 15, 2022)

Life can be mean and brutal, and hide anguish and strife in the middle of gloss and glittering success.


----------



## Blue Orange (Sep 16, 2022)

darjr said:


> Life can be mean and brutal, and hide anguish and strife in the middle of gloss and glittering success.



Count no man happy until his hitpoints are reduced to zero (-10 for traditionalists, and fails three death saves for the new folks.)


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 16, 2022)

Alzrius said:


> Posts like this always remind me of what Rick Marshall, who (as I understand it) was close to many of the people working at WotC in the company's early days and stayed in touch with them later, had to say about why Adkison sold the company (in the comments below the article):



Yeah, as I recall Rick posted a bunch more insights and nitty gritty history details on his blog as well.  Some invaluable insights in there.


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 16, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Cant fault him for health reasons.  Just funny for the book to hype him up so much and then learning it lasted all of about a year or so.
> 
> D&D back in the hands of gamers that valued talent!...... HASBRO.



Well, there's another comment that Marshall makes on that page which puts another spin on that as well (note in particular the second paragraph):



> Fourth, another place I'm going to arm-wave is about the Hasbro purchase of Wizards, since as with the early lawsuit there are things we're not allowed to talk about (and I wish U.S. law didn't allow, let alone enforce, those kinds of perpetual gag clauses in legal agreements, but it does). But here are some things not covered by the purchase agreement, things that do add to this discussion.
> 
> During the negotiations for the purchase, Wizards came to believe that Hasbro valued the Wizards management team and strategy. Most or all of the Hasbro executive team were nearing retirement age, and Wizards came to understand that part of the reason for the purchase was so that the clearly successful Wizards management team could gradually expand their duties and begin to help to manage Hasbro as well, to take over responsibilities so that Hasbro executives could retire.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mannahnin (Sep 16, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Reading about Adkison and how he was a big ol geek who lived his dream to own TSR/D&D.... and then he sold it all to Hasbro and quit within a year.  Hilarious.
> 
> And while I can appreciate that Lorraine Williams "saved" TSR according to this book she ran it straight into the ground.  While Gygax may have been a fantastic gamer but a lousy business owner, She was neither good with games or running a business.



This is really an oversimplification to the point of distortion, IMO.

Riggs is right (though as usual hyperbolic in his yelling "genius!" all the time) that Adkison made really good and smart business moves, and some exceptionally ethical and generous ones, like the bit about giving the TSR art back to the artists.  That he got burnt out by personal issues and overwork (and screwed up in romantic relationships within the company) doesn't negate the genuinely great stuff he accomplished.

He's since kept his hand in gaming and management, buying and running Gen Con, for example.  The guy didn't flame out and crash.  He accomplished massive things with Magic and D&D (and a few other little things like Pokemon, I understand), got personally burnt out, cashed in and scaled back, after Hasbro's original expressed intention to use WotC executive leadership as successors to its own didn't pan out.  And has demonstrated continued success and savvy leadership since, as it appears from Gen Con over the past twenty years.

Williams doesn't have the same track record of success, but she still grew the company (especially the fiction publishing arm) massively, and despite their poor profitability, was the top dog when TSR was producing some incredible stuff many of us love to this day, like Dark Sun and PlaneScape.  I agree that she apparently started running the company into the ground about halfway through her tenure of leadership (1985 to 1997), but she still kept it going longer under her watch than TSR's prior management had done prior to her leadership.  Gygax and the Blumes ran it from 1974 to 1984ish, and also nearly destroyed it with preposterous mismanagement in their last few years, having no idea how to solidify or responsibly consolidate their winnings from the fad period and transition once the fad finally stopped exploding.  As James Lowder (who was there) wrote earlier in the thread, it seems that virtually everyone who worked at TSR under both management regimes preferred Williams, despite all the nasty stories we've heard about her.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 16, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Reading about Adkison and how he was a big ol geek who lived his dream to own TSR/D&D.... and then he sold it all to Hasbro and quit within a year.  Hilarious.
> 
> And while I can appreciate that Lorraine Williams "saved" TSR according to this book she ran it straight into the ground.  While Gygax may have been a fantastic gamer but a lousy business owner, She was neither good with games or running a business.



“ran it straight into the ground” isn’t really a fair characterization.  She averted a potential financial disaster when she took over, and kept the lights on for longer than Gygax and the Blumes did.  It’s fair to say Riggs is erring against Gygax in the book, attributing a big portion of the blame to the Random House deal which was implemented under Gygax.

Given al the crazy stuff Peterson writes about in Game Wizards, it’s hard for me to pretend Gygax would have kept the company alive until 1997 either.


----------



## Davies (Sep 16, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Given al the crazy stuff Peterson writes about in Game Wizards, it’s hard for me to pretend Gygax would have kept the company alive until 1997 either.



The most likely scenario, I think, is that a Gygax-run TSR would probably have released a 2nd edition AD&D* in 1986 or 87, which would have had much the same success as TTL's 2nd edition two years later -- but that it would not have purchased the Forgotten Realms or expanded Dragonlance as much as Williams-run TSR did, and that by 1990 or so, Gygax would have been wanting to try something different, something like Dangerous Dimensions/Journeys, which would probably have been only _slightly_ less of a flop. So by the mid-90s, TSR would be bankrupt, well before Wizards of the Coast would be in any position to save it. There would be no 3rd edition, no OGL, and no OSR.

Something would have taken its place, but there is no rational way of determining what it would have been. (I _imagine_ a version of Exalted more in line with its original conception as the pre-history of the World of Darkness, but that's probably a mirage.)

* Potentially much like Adventures Dark & Deep's reconstruction.


----------



## Orius (Sep 17, 2022)

I think that a TSR that released Gary's 2e isn't as easy to predict as that though.  A lot of the late 1e material wasn't popular among parts of the 1e fanbase, and 2e took some hits from them too because elements of the game were cleaned up and sanitized. That led to a slow shrinking of the customer base. A Gary 2e possibly would have meant no Survival Guides and likely no Manual of the Planes, not only that there certainly wouldn't have been those poorly received Greyhawk modules from the period.  That doesn't mean a Gary 2e would have been a resounding success either though, because UA doesn't always have a great reputation and a Gary 2e might have gone in the sort of direction that book went.  Honestly, it's a big unknown as to whether Gary's 2e would have been successful or a flop.

Gary running things probably wouldn't have seen many different campaign worlds released like 2e did either, at least not with tons of supplements, adventures, and novels attached.  Maybe there would have been occasional works like Oriental Adventures exploring more unusual campaign concepts.  

There wouldn't have been any of the Buck Rogers shenanigans.

The big question here is Magic.  When MtG hit the market, it knocked down a lot of the hobby game companies that weren't being run very well.  There was WoD too, but I think MtG really hit a bigger segment of D&D's fanbase.  We don't know how Gary would have responded to MtG's success.


----------



## Davies (Sep 18, 2022)

Orius said:


> There wouldn't have been any of the Buck Rogers shenanigans.



True; on the other hand, though, imagine a TSR-published version of Cyborg Commando.


----------



## Orius (Sep 18, 2022)

Perhaps.  One of the big unknowns with Gary is what kind of ideas he would have explored with roleplaying.  Around the time he was forced out of TSR, story-driven elements in gaming were becoming all the rage.  Gary though wasn't into that.  If he'd stayed with TSR, he may have tried to push back against that and maybe he would have succeeded, or maybe he would have failed which could have ended TSR earlier.  It's hard to judge by what he did after leaving TSR because he had to start over in the RPG industry and TSR harassed him with legal problems into the 90s.  That harassment was another expense TSR really didn't need to engage in either.


----------



## darjr (Sep 18, 2022)

Orius said:


> Perhaps.  One of the big unknowns with Gary is what kind of ideas he would have explored with roleplaying.  Around the time he was forced out of TSR, story-driven elements in gaming were becoming all the rage.  Gary though wasn't into that.  If he'd stayed with TSR, he may have tried to push back against that and maybe he would have succeeded, or maybe he would have failed which could have ended TSR earlier.  It's hard to judge by what he did after leaving TSR because he had to start over in the RPG industry and TSR harassed him with legal problems into the 90s.  That harassment was another expense TSR really didn't need to engage in either.



Yea, I really wish TSR had left him alone.


----------



## Orius (Sep 19, 2022)

That legal harassment probably did TSR no financial favors, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was a factor in their money troubles.

Honestly, it also makes Williams look vindictive and/or insecure.  Insecure in that it makes it look like she was afraid Gary would successfully create another fantasy RPG that could give D&D serious competition especially with Gary's name on it.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 20, 2022)

I think she was worried about his name recognition still having value in the industry.  A Gygax RPG would have attracted customers on his name alone.  I don't think she cared about, or even that she believed in, his ability to create a good product.  She just didn't want his name on a competing product.


----------



## billd91 (Sep 21, 2022)

Reading the book now. As someone who attended many GenCons during the TSR era and marveled at the TSR castle displays, chapter 23 "The Tomb" cuts kind of deep.


----------



## darjr (Sep 21, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Reading the book now. As someone who attended many GenCons during the TSR era and marveled at the TSR castle displays, chapter 23 "The Tomb" cuts kind of deep.



Yea what a terrible thing.

I think there is an addendum. I remember someone at WotC finding that they were paying for storage from the TSR days that everyone kinda forgot about. In that storage they found treasures thought lost. It’s too bad the storage in Bens book wasn’t part of that.


----------



## Michael Linke (Sep 21, 2022)

Orius said:


> Perhaps.  One of the big unknowns with Gary is what kind of ideas he would have explored with roleplaying.  Around the time he was forced out of TSR, story-driven elements in gaming were becoming all the rage.  Gary though wasn't into that.  If he'd stayed with TSR, he may have tried to push back against that and maybe he would have succeeded, or maybe he would have failed which could have ended TSR earlier.  It's hard to judge by what he did after leaving TSR because he had to start over in the RPG industry and TSR harassed him with legal problems into the 90s.  That harassment was another expense TSR really didn't need to engage in either.



Going over elusive shift, and having not really looked at any of his post-TSR work, i'm skeptical that his own products would have really competed with D&D for the same customers (or even that the gaming market in the late 80s to 90s even wanted what he would have sold).  The market seemed to have been pushing D&D toward story telling from the beginning, despite his efforts to position the game as a first-person wargame.


----------



## GreyLord (Sep 21, 2022)

I'm not sure.

I still get confused over the different RPGs he made right after (Dangerous Journeys and Legendary Adventures) and such.

If he hadn't been plagued by various lawsuits or other items which followed him in prestige, reputation, and other areas while he was trying to push his newer games and writings, who knows how successful he could have been.


----------



## darjr (Oct 18, 2022)

Book: Last Dragon, First Wizard
					

Slaying the Dragon: A Secret History of Dungeons & Dragons  by Ben Riggs, St. Martin's Press, 2022 Provenance: Birthday present, 2022. Read ...




					grubbstreet.blogspot.com


----------



## darjr (Oct 18, 2022)

How weird to be IN a history book such as this. To be part of the subject matter.


----------



## darjr (Oct 18, 2022)

This bit I didn't get from the book, I must have glossed over it. The bit about the SPI rights.



> not only returning the original art to the artists, but also tracking down the original designers of the SPI games he inherited and returned _their_ rights as well.


----------



## Orius (Oct 20, 2022)

Sounds like things Grubb remembers but the book doesn't mention.


----------



## Mannahnin (Oct 20, 2022)

Orius said:


> Sounds like things Grubb remembers but the book doesn't mention.



Yes.  



> Reading the book brought back a lot of memories of my time at TSR, not all of them good. There are a lot of stories untold by this volume. Dragon Dice. Dawizard. The Christmas our bonus consisted of a discount coupon on a turkey (not even a turkey, but a discount coupon). Various executives who were let go right after buying a house in the area. And some good things as well. Radio Free Roger. Quote of the Day. Peter, when he took over the company, not only returning the original art to the artists, but also tracking down the original designers of the SPI games he inherited and returned _their_ rights as well.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Oct 24, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> Yes.




If you some not so nice ongoings I recommend Game Wizards.  It's about how Gary and Dave did not get along and all the fighting they did.  Been a good read so far.  Both men where gamers and godfathers of RPGs but turns out also human.  And humans can be quite petty when money gets involved.


----------



## Mannahnin (Nov 21, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> If you some not so nice ongoings I recommend Game Wizards.  It's about how Gary and Dave did not get along and all the fighting they did.  Been a good read so far.  Both men where gamers and godfathers of RPGs but turns out also human.  And humans can be quite petty when money gets involved.



Oh yes, all of Peterson's books are excellent.  I read Game Wizards prior to Slaying the Dragon, and the latter made an enjoyable follow-up to the former in part because it picks up after it chronologically, and also because the substantial change in tone and approach added variety.


----------



## darjr (Nov 29, 2022)

The book is up on GoodReads 



> Unbelievably, with over 2.8 million votes cast in the contest as a whole, Slaying the Dragon has made it to the final round of voting on Goodreads! According to them, it’s one of the ten best history books of the year! Other authors who made the cut in other categories? Stephen King, Jodi Picoult, Celeste Ng, Brandon Sanderson, Ruth Ware, and Naomi Novik. If you’d be good enough to vote for Slaying, I’d appreciate it! Link below.











						Final Round: Vote for the Best History & Biography of 2022!
					

Discover the Best History & Biography in the 2022 Goodreads Choice Awards, the only major book awards decided by readers.



					www.goodreads.com


----------



## evildmguy (Dec 29, 2022)

Coming in late to this. 

On the book:  I, like several others, didn't like the prose.  It read like a transcript of a podcast, where each chapter was a podcast on a particular subject.  I think my negative reaction is due to it being called a History book and having that word in its title.  This is a book of stories.  I'm not saying he didn't do research, he did.  I'm saying that how he lays out the research in the book didn't work for me.  I got tired of the "genius" moniker he gave to so many, of ending paragraphs with a question or ellipses, and not having a timeline for each chapter.  Yes, the 9/11 contrast fell flat with me.  Despite the writing I didn't like, I did get insight into what was happening during the 90s, which I appreciate.  I knew nothing about WotC, as I wasn't into MtG, so that was interesting as well. 

On TSR:  I'm sorry it was a bad place to work at times.  I suppose most workers like me can say that it happens.  I do agree that Lorraine Williams kept the company going for longer than Gygax and the Blumes but obviously, all were human and none were business people. 

On myself:  I have been gaming for 42 years, and hope to double that.  I love gaming.  Live for it.  I was almost a total TSR fanboy.  I think the only things I didn't get were the Glorantha gazetteers and some board games.  I had Spelljammer, Planescape, Birthright, Red Steel, and more until it was taking up too much shelf space.  Further, I had never used or ran any of them.  I still have FR and Dark Sun and core rules books as well as all of my 3E stuff.  I played Spellfire (and am glad to understand why the art was reused) and Blood Wars.  I collected Dragon Dice.  Now I play PF1 and Level Up and use whatever rules or ideas make it fun for my groups.  I talk about myself because I did buy most of what TSR created and read it even if I didn't use it.  I wasn't following one brand, which appears to be more common. 

I'm curious about Peterson's book now and may read that next. 

Thanks for the conversation!


----------



## Mannahnin (Dec 29, 2022)

evildmguy said:


> I was almost a total TSR fanboy.  I think the only things I didn't get were the Glorantha gazetteers and some board games.



I presume you meant Mystara, here?  (Glorantha being the setting for Chaosium's RuneQuest).



evildmguy said:


> I'm curious about Peterson's book now and may read that next.
> 
> Thanks for the conversation!



All three of Peterson's books are excellent (though Playing at the World is massive and a bit of a slog due to the sheer depth and size; and he's refined his prose/writing style a bit since).  

Cheers!


----------



## evildmguy (Dec 29, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> I presume you meant Mystara, here?  (Glorantha being the setting for Chaosium's RuneQuest).
> 
> 
> All three of Peterson's books are excellent (though Playing at the World is massive and a bit of a slog due to the sheer depth and size; and he's refined his prose/writing style a bit since).
> ...



Oops, yes, Mystara.  Thanks!

I was a bit surprised when I went looking that the paperbacks for Peterson's books are cheaper than Kindle, which is how I read Slaying the Dragon.  The thing stopping me is that I wasn't paying attention to non DND stuff until '85, when my brother/DM graduated and I took over.  Eventually.  Then with the part time job, I did get d6 Star Wars, Shadowrun, Battletech, and more.  Even then, I didn't read Dragon consistently until much later, so I knew nothing about TSR other than what products were at my local gaming store.  

I can relate to the '90s stuff because '95 is when I graduated college and had a job.  I was buying TSR stuff already but now I really stepped it up!  I also remember when Dragon didn't show up for several months and the products didn't show up.  And of course, when Eric Noah started posting news about gaming!


----------



## Mannahnin (Dec 29, 2022)

Whereas I came in a bit later, in '85, but almost immediately started picking up Dragon magazine issues from my local mall book store and from gaming/hobby shops whenever I could get to one.  So I was exposed to other games pretty early, albeit mostly through advertising and reviews.  And flipping through copies in game and book stores whenever I could get to one.  I also got some experience actually playing them at conventions here and there (including Shadowrun at LehighCon at Lehigh University when it first came out), but definitely the 90s is when I got more exposure.


----------

