Monday, March 18, 2024

The Problem with Appendix N

Since its start sixteen(!) years ago this month, an overriding concern of this blog has been the literary inspirations of Dungeons & Dragons, particularly those stories and books belonging to what I call "pulp fantasy."  Though there are several reasons why this topic has been of such interest to me, the primary one remains my sense that, in the decades since its initial publication in 1974, Dungeons & Dragons has moved conceptually ever farther away from its origins in the minds of Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax – and the works that inspired them.

The argument can be made, of course, that this movement was, in fact, a good thing, as it broadened the appeal of both D&D and, by extension, roleplaying games as a hobby, thereby leading to their continued success half a century later. I have no interest in disputing this point of view at the present time, not least of all because it contains quite a bit of truth. My concern has rarely been about the merits of the shift, but rather about establishing that it occurred. To do that, one needs to recognize and understand the authors and books that inspired the game in the first place.

It's fortunate, then, that Gary Gygax was quite forthcoming about his literary inspirations, providing us with several different lists of the writers and literature that he considered to have been the most immediate influences upon him in his creation of the game. The most well-known of these lists is Appendix N of the AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide. While I was not the first person to draw attention to the importance of Appendix N – Erik Mona, publisher of Paizo, springs immediately to mind as a noteworthy early advocate – it's no mere boast to suggest that Grognardia played a huge role in promoting Appendix N and its contents during the early days of the Old School Renaissance.

So successful was that promotion that discussions of Appendix N proliferated well beyond this blog, to the point where, a decade and a half later, "Appendix N fantasy" has become almost a brand unto itself. One need only look at the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG from Goodman Games to see a high-profile example of what I mean, though I could cite many others. If nothing else, it's a testament to just how inspiring others found the authors and books that had earlier inspired Gygax. There was clearly a hunger for a different kind of fantasy beyond the endless parade of Tolkien knock-offs Terry Brooks inaugurated (and that Dragonlance formally introduced into D&D).

Yet, for all that, Appendix N suffers from a very clear problem, one that has limited its utility as a guide for understanding Dungeons & Dragons as Gary Gygax understood it: it's just a list. Gygax, unfortunately, provides no commentary on any of the authors or works included in the list, stating only that those he included "were of particular inspiration" He later emphasizes that certain authors, like Fritz Leiber, Robert E. Howard, and H.P. Lovecraft, among others, played a stronger role in "help[ing] to shape the form of the game." Beyond these brief remarks, Gygax says nothing else about what he found inspirational in these books and authors or why he selected them over others he chose not to include.

In addition, Appendix N is long, consisting of nearly thirty different authors and many more books. Drawing any firm conclusions about what Gygax saw in these works is not always easy, something that, in my opinion, might have been easier had the list been shorter and more focused. That's not to say it's impossible to get some sense of what Gygax liked and disliked in fantasy and how they impacted his vision for Dungeons & Dragons, but it's certainly harder than it needs to be. 

Compare Gygax's Appendix N to the one found in RuneQuest. The list is about half as long (if you exclude other RPGs cited) and every entry is annotated, albeit briefly. Reading the RQ version of Appendix N, one has a very strong sense of not only why the authors found a book inspirational, but what each book inspired in them (and, thus, in RuneQuest). As much as I love Gygax's selection of authors and works, I can't help but think that selection would have proven more useful if he'd taken the time to elaborate, if only a little, on what he liked about its entries.

I found myself thinking about this recently, because I've been pondering the possibility of including an analog to Appendix N in Secrets of sha-Arthan. Since the game has a somewhat exotic setting that deviates from the standards of vanilla fantasy, I feel it might be helpful to point to pre-existing works of fantasy and science fiction (not to mention other roleplayng games) that inspired me as I developed the setting. That's why, if I do include a list of inspirations, it'll likely be both fairly short and annotated – closer to RuneQuest's Appendix N than to Gygax's.

None of this should be taken as a repudiation of Appendix N or the works included in it as vital to understanding Dungeons & Dragons and Gary Gygax's initial vision for it. I still think there is insight to be gleaned by reading and re-reading the works of pulp fantasy included in the appendix and will continue to recommend them to anyone who asks for recommendations of fantasy worthy of their time. Nor should any of the foregoing discourage anyone from taking the time to read Howard or Leiber or Lovecraft, as doing so is time well spent and more than sufficient reward in its own right. However, with some time and perspective, I recognize that Appendix N has certain shortcomings that can make it less than adequate as a guide to "what Dungeons & Dragons is about."

23 comments:

  1. I think Gary probably left it vague on purpose. So you can get allusions to what he might have been inspired by in the works but also not bread crumbing players to think exactly how they should view the game or a fantasy experience.

    It's similar to how Lovecraft himself cleverly uses allusion to describe the horrors in most of his works... because spelling it out directly, or thinking you have direct knowledge of the thing ruins the MYSTIQUE and terror.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Good music never talks about anything other than the music. If you ask Bach, 'What is your meaning?' he say 'Listen! That is the meaning.'" Allen Watts

      Delete
    2. Yeah, that realization hit me about English literature after I'd declared my major in English and realized how much I hated being taught "how" to read a book. I'd learned how to read when I was 4 thankyouverymuch; being an English major almost ruined reading for me altogether.

      Delete
  2. The OSR's focus on Appendix N is directly responsible for my own digging further into the list, and discovering more books that I hadn't read yet, and have enjoyed whole-heartedly. In fact, most of my favorite books appear on that list, and I am still working through it. At 43 (born in 1980), I've finally read the Hiero stories from Sterling Lanier, and I was blown away. They stand in my top 10 of all time, and the way psionics work in Lanier's world is a huge inspiration to me. There are other key books I've yet to read, but I expect I'll find more to love. I can't get enough Appendix N inspired adventures, settings, and games, so I say keep them coming, but not as a primer to D&D, just as a way to keep stuff weird! Vanilla D&D is fine, but one look at the covers you've used in this post makes me yearn for something strange, arcane, even dark. I think going back to the past for inspiration can push the boundaries of the present into areas occasionally ignored, and I like that. Anything that gets us reading is good, of course (not that your post in any way discourages any of that, I'm just a like mind that agrees with you that Appendix N has had a huge effect on).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And now you can join the rest of us in wishing he'd written more during his lifetime. The only thing I ever read by him I didn't love was The War For the Lot and even that was okay. The Hiero books led me to track down his other writings, and his Ffellowes stories started a lifelong love of "pub story" fiction that I might never have discovered otherwise.

      Delete
  3. Glad to see you back, James. Great post, as usual!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The heart of Appendix N is as follows:

    de Camp & Pratt
    "Harold Shea" Series
    CARNELIAN CUBE

    Howard, R. E.
    "Conan" Series

    Leiber, Fritz
    "Fafhrd & Gray Mouser" Series
    et al

    Vance, Jack
    THE EYES OF THE OVERWORLD
    THE DYING EARTH
    et al

    Lovecraft, H. P.

    Merritt, A.
    CREEP, SHADOW, CREEP
    MOON POOL
    DWELLERS IN THE MIRAGE
    et al

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that the most important thing about Appendix N for me is that "inspired by" shouldn't be confused with "meant to emulate"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Glad to see you back! And... there are entirely too many novels I've let slide past me for a read or repeat read on the list! Tally hoe!

    ReplyDelete
  7. "My concern has rarely been about the merits of the shift, but rather about establishing that it occurred."

    Indeed it did, and the literature of Appendix N now endures some harsh criticism for all of its imbedded "isms." So many of things fans of Appendix N take for granted are now taboo in contemporary role playing and fantasy literature. When non-fans read Appendix N material, there's a real need for some historical perspective akin to what one needed to appreciate Mark Twain or Rudyard Kipling in the 1980s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which prove the point that "modern" TTRPGs and fiction are mostly crap: they're too worried about being politically correct and "Woke"

      Delete
    2. It's always fascinating when someone sees a relatively neutral, objective statement like "You need historical perspective if you want to read [e.g. Lovecraft given how hideously racist he was]" and decides to read it as a completely unsupported gross generalization about how supposedly "modern fiction is mostly crap."

      Delete
  8. one of the problems of going first is you don't know what you need to do. everyone else gets to react to your failures. Gygax likely did not think he had to explain anything.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Great post! I'm glad you're back, James.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hello. Lovely to see you back at the keyboard.

    I agree with you utterly that the list gives us only a hint at what inspired him. Asking EGG about what exactly was it that got those authors and books into Appendix N now makes it onto my list of conversations I want to have once I pass through the Pearly Gates.

    ReplyDelete
  11. He's BAAAaaaAAAck! Strangely appropriate post for me, with James Ward's passing. I'm been wanting to work on my Appendix Gamma (personal as well as historically attributed) and now a primary source and a sage is no longer here. It has been a melancholy week.

    ReplyDelete