The First Appendix N

Long ago, I posted very briefly on this blog about the strange serendipity between the bibliographies of 1978's RuneQuest and 1979's Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Masters Guide. Both bibliographies are the fourteenth appendix in their respective volumes, which is quite a coincidence – and a coincidence I am sure it is (for logistical reasons, if nothing else). Even if it weren't, the writers of RQ make it quite clear that, despite superficial similarities, their Appendix N is actually very different in both its content and intention than Gygax's own list. This becomes even clearer as you take a closer look at it.

The first section of the RuneQuest bibliography is an interesting mix of books, equal parts fiction and non-fiction. Unless my memory fails me, there isn't a single non-fiction work on Gygax's Appendix N. The non-fiction books consist largely of books about the the ancient world, arms, and armor, while the fiction books include authors you'd probably expect. Here's a scan of the selections:

I appreciate the comments after each entry. Unlike those in Gygax's Appendix N, those here give the reader a sense of why they were included and that's helpful. For example, we see that illustrations factored into whether many non-fiction books appeared. In the case of fiction, the phrase "basic source of modern fantasy" appears several times. Note, too, how often the west coast term "FRP" is employed, a term that pops up regularly in the pages of Different Worlds magazine. The inclusion of Clark Ashton Smith – in particularly his stories of Hyperborea – makes me smile, since Gygax inexplicably did not include him in his Appendix N.

The second section highlights "other fantasy role-playing games," along with the addresses of their publishers.

This is an odd list, most because it's not especially selective. Most of the RPGs available in print at the time are included, the vast majority of which, I'd wager, exercised no influence whatsoever over the design and development of RuneQuest. I draw your attention to the inclusion of the game Legacy by David A. Feldt; it's a good example of a RPG with zero influence on RQ (or any subsequent roleplaying game, for that matter), yet here it is listed alongside Dungeons & Dragons and Tunnels & Trolls. 

My suspicion is that the authors were trying to be exhaustive in an effort to promote the hobby more generally, not just their own contributions to it. That's one way that Chaosium – or the Chaosium, as it was still known at the time – was quite different than, say, TSR of the same era: the company was always trying to promote roleplaying in general and not just their own products. I still find that quite an admirable stance.

Appendix N continues with two more sections. The first is entitled "For Living in the Period" and includes the address of the Society for Creative Anachronism. The role the SCA played in the development of the hobby of roleplaying is, I think, under-appreciated. Many early gamers and game designers, especially on the west coast, were either directly or peripherally involved with the SCA. For example, Basic Role-Playing owes a lot to Steve Perrin's experiences in that organization, especially its combat system. The SCA was, in those days, a meeting place for science fiction and fantasy writers, fans, and elements of the late '60s counter-culture, so it's little surprise that it served as a crucible for the burgeoning fantasy gaming scene. 

The final section is entitled "For Multi-Sided Dice" and lists only Lou Zocchi & Associates, along with its address. At the time RuneQuest was first published, there were, of course, other manufacturers of polyhedral dice but Zocchi's dice had the reputation for being the best. Most RPGs at the time, if they  included dice at all, included Zocchi dice. I remain very fond of them myself to this day, largely for esthetic reasons: I simply prefer the sharp edges of precision dice over rounded ones.

RuneQuest's Appendix N offers a fascinating contrast to Gygax's own. Both speak, I think, to the fundamentally literary origins of early RPGs, even as they reveal their authors' different literary preferences. Reading them side by side, one is immediately struck by the different cultures that produced each game – as anyone who has played them can attest. It's precisely those differences that enabled them to exist side by side, appealing as they did to different tastes, sensibilities, and interests. There has never been a one-size-fits-all fantasy roleplaying game, despite the claims of overly zealous partisans; there's more than enough room for many. Indeed, given the wide variability of the fantasy genre, I would even go so far as to say there's a need for many fantasy roleplaying games.