It really isn’t hard to find Pre-Wizards of the Coast gaming materials and information about how these games were played. Many people still play them. Many of those same people are even in a position to answer question about rules, modifications to rules, interpretations of conflicting rules, and the history of many of these games.

PRO TIP:

If you are interested in understanding old games, then find and talk to people who play old games. Period.

With that out of the way . . .

The Game and Game History Resources

First step is to get the games themselves. One can visit a Friendly Local Game Store and check the bulletin board postings and ask questions of the staff. One can also hit up ebay and other third-party dealers in used materials for sale.

Some games from the old Tactical Studies Rules (TSR) are available in electronic (PDF) and in some cases a print-on-demand (POD) format from retailers such as DriveThruRPG.

• For example, the TSR AD&D 1st Edition (1E) line of products at DTRPG Store is linked HERE.

Other pertinent links that can be of benefit to the nuArcheologist of Gaming:

Rick Stump’s Substack, podcasts, and blog. There’s even a Discord.

• Rick has run an AD&D 1E campaign for over 47 years, and it may be one of the longest running campaigns of 1st Edition.

• He also runs various other RPG campaigns on the regular. He has a wealth of game knowledge on game systems and the history of tabletop gaming.

Alex Macris’ Book “Arbiter of Worlds” and Arbiter of Worlds Substack

• Read “Arbiter of Worlds” and the section on interpreting laws and rules to understand that most rules are written so the average person can comprehend them.

• The AD&D books were written to target an audience that read at about the 8th Grade reading level (in 1977) and up. They are not written in special code that requires a Rosetta Stone, though a common dictionary can be helpful at times.

Dragonsfoot

• Discussions by people who still play these pre-WotC games.

• Online forum and gaming resources — you can ask questions of people who actually play the games that were developed in the mid- to late-20th Century.

• Good stuff here, but be on your better behavior (use please, thank you, you’re welcome, and all that).

Various resources for do-it-yourself campaign building and a history of various pre-built campaign worlds.

• Medieval Demographics Made Easy — now hosted by Bat in the Attic

• Canonfire

• Greyhawk Online

• The Acaeum

• Donjon

Advice on Archaeology

Actual advice on archaeology? Oh, heck no. But some practical advice on digging up information that is split between the analog and the digital age.

Analog/Digital break point (subjective): about 1982 — when the Commodore 64 went on sale. Why? The C-64 was the most popular home computer ever.

(1) One of the big No-Nos of research is to not assume you know something when you have no evidence for it. This is especially bothersome when people who might know the answer to those questions are still with us and available to answer them.

• You are only dipping back about 40 to 60 years, not unearthing Tutankhamen and his history.

• Please don’t pass off your speculations as ‘authoritative pronouncements’ which lack the data to back up those claims — that just makes you look silly when you are shown to be wrong.

You can take that advice either from Don Miguel Ruiz or from the Bad News Bears. Entirely up to you which you prefer.

(2) If you aren’t listening to someone who is actively engaged in what you are researching, then you should reach back to someone who was recently engaged in it, if they are available. If neither is available, then you should attempt to find multiple authoritative sources that cover the period of time in question. In the case of RPGs, that can be as far back as the 1860s.

For practical purposes, likely the 1960s are as far back as you may need to reach. That means that people in one of the first two categories mentioned are likely available to talk to you and help you resolve your question.

Keep in mind that authoritative sources in the pre-1982 era of gaming will probably have their information in hard copy or digital images rather than electronic text. Even if electronic, those formats may not be readable easily on modern computer systems (we see you, Dragon Magazine!)

(3) Terminology changes over time in game systems. Terminology also changes between game systems of similar eras. Be careful about the use of terms when discussing games and clarify frequently in your discussion which term is associated with which game from what time period or edition.

A typical faux pas is conflating terms from past systems and the current terminology used today by some gamers for:

a short-duration tactical or strategic military encounter (or series of encounters) between multiple groups of combatants.

Compare the terminology for this event between old and new systems.

• Old System (AD&D 1st Edition): “Adventure”

• Modern Adversarial PVP Gaming Event: “Campaign”

What does the term “Campaign” mean then in AD&D 1E system?

A “campaign” in AD&D 1E refers to the persistent WORLD in which PCs, NPCs, and other game elements exist and interact — often referred to as the CAMPAIGN WORLD.

As a nuArchaeologist of Gaming(TM), when you are reading older games you MUST not overlay newer definitions over older terms, unless you verify that the meanings are the same between the two systems.

This really applies to ANY game systems from ANY period of gaming. If you begin to mix your definitions between gaming systems, then your conclusions will be flawed from the outset.

This is VERY common in modern nuArchaeology!

That’s enough for a starter kit. Dust off those picks and shovels, and don’t forget your Rosetta Stone dictionary and thesaurus. Post your comments and concerns below.

Later, Folks!

Background Information

The Role Playing Game Association (RPGA), originally known as the Role-Playing Gamers Association and later the RPGA Network, was an organized play association, which was founded in November 1980 by Frank Mentzer of Tactical Study Rules (aka, TSR Incorporated, the company formed by Gary Gygax and Don Kaye to publish the original Dungeons & Dragons) to ostensibly unite tabletop role-playing enthusiasts and promote high-quality roleplaying within select venues.

The RPGA accomplished several things between its inception in 1980 through its formal retirement in 2014:

• Primary Function: The RPGA was created to run competitive tournament roleplay events at gaming conventions using pre-generated characters and game modules for TSR games systems, to include Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, Top Secret, and Gamma World.

• Living Campaigns: It pioneered “living campaigns” such as Living City and Living Greyhawk, allowing thousands of players worldwide to contribute to a shared, evolving game world through coordinated modules1.

• Publications and Membership: Members received a subscription to the Polyhedron Newszine (published by the RPGA from 1981 to 2002.) RPGA members could participate in shared gaming events hosted across the US, with membership expanding internationally by 19892.

• Corporate History: Wizards of the Coast acquired the RPGA when it purchased TSR in 1997. Wizards later discontinued the original incarnation of the association in 2014.

The gaming campaign world where RPGA events were first run was called Greyhawk. This was the world Gary had created for his home campaign, and in August of 1980, a folio was published containing large color maps of the countries and regions included in “The Flanaess" and source books with brief descriptions and histories of that portion of Gary’s planet called “Oerth.”

Maps from the World of Greyhawk Folio Edition (1980) appeared as shown below.

Contents of the World of Greyhawk Boxed Set (1983) are shown below.

To learn more about the Greyhawk campaign setting for 1st Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, you can visit Canonfire and Greyhawk Online to help you fill in the blanks in your knowledge. The Greyhawk campaign setting is the one I adopted to modify and use during my years playing AD&D 1st Edition and into 2nd Edition.3

As stated above, RPGA’s primary mission upon inception was to promote gaming at conventions, not at the individual tabletops of gamers who played TSR’s RPGs. Their goal was running standardized events at any given official convention or other sanctioned roleplaying event.

That meant standardizing rules and judging events in standardized and consistent manner, much like national and international chess and poker competitions.

A standardized rule set could be had if TSR could lock the rules for one or both of its versions of Dungeons & Dragons RPGs. TSR had two versions of Dungeons & Dragons prior to 1980. One was Advanced Dungeons & Dragons — its three core volumes of the Monster Manual (1977/78), the Players Handbook (1979), and the Dungeon Masters Guide (1979) — which was the anticipated “updated” version of its original “3 Little Brown Books” in pamphlet format.

These Original D&D (OD&D) books had already spawned a “Version 2” of OD&D via various iterations, primarily via a rewrite by John Eric Holmes (“Holmes Basic” in 1977), and then the subsequent 1981 “B/X Versions” by Tom Moldvay, which evolved into the BECMI (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, and Immortals) System over its lifetime at TSR. Players often referred to this as “D&D Basic.”

[ Side note: The D&D Basic System is still the most popular Old School Renaissance (OSR) core game system and is widely used as the basis for new roleplaying games of the D&D type. AD&D is cloned primarily in OSRIC. ]

The choice TSR made was to attempt to make Advanced Dungeons & Dragons the top-down directed rule base for the RPGA convention events. The “D&D Basic" line would be would be left for independent gamers to modify as they would choose. This was what led up to Gary’s “conflict” with his customers in 1979 in Dragon Magazine.

The push to move AD&D into the top-down-directed mode would take its new direction with The Dragon (aka Dragon Magazine) Issue 26. Here, in his article “D&D, AD&D, and Gaming,” Gary made the TSR heel turn — possibly for several reasons — to make AD&D rules “fixed” unless changed by TSR, for the purposes of more uniform play across the country — an allusion to the soon-to-be-established RPGA and standardized convention gaming methodologies. No more random house rules4 to change AD&D, as that would make the game “Not AD&D.”

Links regarding this shift from “open to closed” on AD&D changes are given below and show an interesting mix of views on this change. James Maliszewski has some worthwhile posts and discussion on the topic, and the Dragonsfoot forum has a couple back-and-forth convos with some good bits of info on what Gary and TSR may have been thinking on the subject.

Grognardia (Feb 2010): Gygax on OD&D and AD&D

“…D&D has turned into a non-game.” (Gary Gygax, Dragon #26, June 1979)

Grognardia (Feb 2010): Gygaxian Revisionism

“After Guidon published Chainmail, and that became one of its most popular sellers – and what with all the questions pertaining to fantasy – it became apparent that there was a larger element of people interested in fantasy than we had thought. So I began working on what I initially thought of as a supplement to Chainmail, and it eventually grew into its own game.” (Gary Gygax, Polyhedron #1, Summer 1981)

Grognardia (Sep 2020): Gary Gygax with “OD&D” as a Non-Game Again

“I believe that the RPGA influence is going to help raise the level of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons play by enforcing a little more conformity. I don't mind creativity, I don't mind mutation, if it brings out better game play, and superior gaming in general. But from everything that I can see, all the changes that I can see are usually foolish and meant to either baby players along or kill them off, one way or another. They're destructive rather than creative.” (Gary Gygax, Polyhedron #1, Summer 1981)

Dragonsfoot Forums: Dragon articles where Gary says what is and what is not AD&D?

Dragonsfoot Forums: Gary Gygax in The Strategic Review and in Dragon Magazine

All this “enforcing a little more conformity” is fine, but the underlying theme keeps dragging us back to the likely rationale by TSR of “how do we run a national — or international — scored tournament series, where points and status are awarded, if there isn’t an iron-clad, immutable set of rules that only TSR has the authority to change?”

The difficulty with that thought process by TSR is that the company’s 1983 tagline of “Products of Your Imagination” had taken hold at independent tables all across the country by 1981 — if not long before — even before that tagline was used for both D&D Basic and AD&D.

Yeah, try to put THAT genie back in the bottle, Gary.

What was an RPGA tournament like? Here are a couple from-the-road reports, courtesy of Dragonsfoot and links therein.

1. An example of organized play experience under the RPGA system.

2. Highlighted history of why GenCon existed: tournament play.

Modules that were originally run at tournaments within conventions? A lot of them were, especially in 1st Edition. A partial list is provided in these posts on the Dragonsfoot Forums, along with some play details.

• Post 1.

• Post 2.

What TSR did next took “convention competition” to the next level. Clearly, not all players had the time or resources to travel to conventions, and convention venues couldn’t host them all if players and DMs could travel to those locations.

What to do?

TSR’s answer was to leverage the Friendly Local Game Stores (FLGS) that carried TSR products to distribute official, scored RPGA events as a “living campaign”, with points awarded on the honor system. What is a “living campaign?” This will help explain.

In 1987, with the new 2nd Edition of AD&D’s two core handbooks released (the PHB and the DMG), the Forgotten Realms “Living City” of Raven’s Bluff was introduced to the convention gaming circuit. A player’s characters could earn experience points to advance, and (potentially) influence the outcome of Raven’s Bluff and the world in which it existed by playing in TSR adventure modules geared to the setting. More here under the RPGA listing for “living campaigns.”

Additional background and information on the “Living City” is found at Dragonsfoot, RPG.net, the Forgotten Realms Wiki, and The Acaeum.

Unfortunately, TSR had a bit of a glitch around the turn of the Cultural Ground Zero impact with their distributor, Random House. (Oh, dear. A debt bubble. How — unexpected.) That was the capper, among other such annoyances.

Wizards of the Coast picked up the pieces of the 2nd Edition, and all the other goofball stuff going on at TSR — remember, kids, don’t forget what business you are actually in — and forged a new game from the ashes:

WotC 3.0.

And it was exactly the roleplaying game that you might expect from a Collectible Card Game Company.5

Well, essentially, the Living City concept looked good, so WotC forged ahead to move Greyhawk into the shared gaming space the Forgotten Realms once occupied and developed, creating — Living Greyhawk.

Living Greyhawk ran on WotC 3.x and official content from WotC HQ, played at conventions and at-home venues by RPGA members. More details here, here, here, and here.

(Boy, I wish this information was NOT. SO. HARD. TO. FIND.)

RPGA’s Impacts on Tabletop Gaming and AD&D in Particular

How did it all work out?

1. Is D&D play better today because of RPGA and their efforts?

2. Did they manage to maintain the integrity of the AD&D game across the nation and internationally, so that it has continued to be played as it was intended?

3. Do the AD&D rules manage to hold up for competitive play, as Chess and Poker do?

4. Did TSR or WotC help preserve the knowledge of the games they owned, administered, and distributed so others would know about them?

Back to RPGA’s performance . . .

Sadly, no. RPGA didn’t even follow their own requirements and game rules of AD&D, based on some play reports linked above. Similarly, some convention participants experienced referees who were inadequately trained or not compatible to the task of performing the DM’s functions at conventions.

Standardization of the rules means little if you can’t even come close to standardizing the performance of the referees.

Was there DM “training” from TSR or WotC to ensure that DMs were qualified on the rules and knew how to run a table at a convention? Why sure, and you even receive a certificate upon completion! Let’s drop by the site where it all happens!

Oh.

Well, that’s unfortunate.

In fairness to all involved, standardizing the rules for AD&D, or a more modern D&D game, or ANY roleplaying game for these types of events would be anyone’s nightmare compared to the much simpler rule sets for Chess and Poker.

The number of parameters and variables within AD&D is vastly more complex, even if you locked the rules tight as a drum and had Brainiac 5 clones inter-connected by pulsed-neutrino comm-band earbuds as DMs at every table . . .

… unless you are working on the railroad — if you know what I mean, and I think you do.6

What appears may have happened is that RPGA — operating in a time of no HTML-based Internet, limited Command-line Internet (mainly at colleges, universities, and some high schools), coupled with limited general computer access for the average family for writing, formatting, and printing (much less having access to a handy Kinko’s) — split the AD&D user base into at minimum of two, perhaps three or more, separate user bases.

There was already a split between D&D Basic and AD&D created by TSR. Both games were still played in three other homes in my rural area where the RPG bug had taken hold. How many more enjoyed both, but were only counted as one on surveys? Sales data says AD&D dominated, but D&D Basic could be a fun ride.

The AD&D split was at least between RPGA members, advocates, and convention goers and non-RPGA members. The RPGA members were probably more likely to be the people who were close to a convention site, likely in a larger urban setting, and had at least some ready cash to be part of the upper tiers of RPGA by attending and competing in convention play.

Non-members were likely to be those who didn’t have those resources to be a regular part of convention play in competition. These folks might make it to a rare con and might even play at a competitive RPG table, but on a very irregular basis. They would most likely be in the group that was designing their own campaign and gaming locally.

Variations of the two above scenarios might add in whether there was a FLGS nearby, whether Dragon Magazine, White Dwarf, or other gaming products and supplements were available, and again whether the gamer had the cash to afford to buy these things. Game books were not cheap. A $20 book in 1980 would be about $80 today — the price of a AAA Game. Allowances of $20 a week were not all that common.

At least three tiers of RPG gamer appear to fall out of these assumptions:

1. Well-heeled enough to afford books, supplements, magazines, RPGA membership, and convention travel/attendance.

2. Enough cash to get books, perhaps a couple magazines or supplements, and maybe lucky to be close to a convention on occasion. Might be an RPGA member.

3. Not enough dough for much beyond books — maybe Dragon on the regular, but no conventions and no travel, so no need for RPGA membership.

Gamers of all three tiers can mix and match, so maybe there is a fair bit of sharing of game materials or magazines, and maybe some photocopying of critical information from books out of reach by some. Definitely a LOT of spiral-bound notebooks were in use.

But, no file sharing, little or no looking stuff up on even the command-line Internet, and you have to rely on your library, your bike, and landline phones for information. As an RPG gamer in the early days, you were often your own little island with a few friends around you, armed with pencils, pens, paper, and your imagination.

If anyone was geared to PRESERVE the game as played, it should have been RPGA — if that was the intent — standardized rules, and all, right? But, if that was the plan, then RPGA failed, and failed miserably.

Do I believe that was the intent?

No. I think RPGA was a business mechanism to get more people regularly involved in conventions, in buying more supplements, and selling the TSR brand. It served the same function as the AD&D and D&D Basic ads in comic books, as the Dungeon & Dragons cartoon show, and as the ad copy in Dragon and other publications: MOVE MORE PRODUCT.

TSR was a business.

They were in business to make money.

They forgot who they were on the road to 1997 and paid dearly for it.

Discussion Section

joins the conversation to share some of his experiences related to gaming, RPGA, and living campaign gaming. Rick started his AD&D 1E campaign world with a town near the sea and road leading into the wilderness, and it’s been running steadily for over 47 years. Be sure to follow him on his Substack linked here:

Worlds and Time

Tips on Gaming, Writing, Parenting, and Understanding the World

By Rick Stump

(1) How much of an effect did Dragon Magazine, White Dwarf, and other game supplements have on the development of your campaign?

Rick Stump:
Dragon was very influential for starting discussions and giving examples. Lots and lots of people I knew would try out the NPC classes (which were obviously billed as such to prevent them being seen as ‘official’). I know that the alternate jousting rules from an issue of Dragon form ‘79 were popular enough I saw photocopies a few times back when that was tough and expensive for high school kids.

But the real impact was pointing out stuff to think about in game, like ventilation in dungeons, balancing new spells and magic items, what does motivate evil NPCs? And so on. It often led to more research and I was glad I was in a university town.

But White Dwarf, Dragon, and so on did have direct impact through magic items, maps/dungeons, spells, and so on. One DM I was friends with used a lot of NPC classes in his game, I tossed in a fair number of monsters back then, and spells were popular, too. One story my players like is how I worked on rules for weapon mastery for about 4 weeks, wrote them up long hand, copied them, and the next issue of Dragon had the weapon specialization rules from UA in them! We knew the official rules would trump my house rules but that plus my other interests prompted me to make my own new class, the Nobleman, so the magazines really did directly affect play.

MotA:
Yes, the magazines or supplements were great prompters to go do more research. We’d spend time in the school library or hit an encyclopedia to find out what some of the things in the game really were if they existed. We’d also get into the old fiction list and pull stuff from there to see if it would work in the game.

”Best of Dragon” was often a great way to see several NPCs together and we’d test them out, or make our own. The Cloistered Cleric, the Scout (our version), and our own version of the Druid were popular in our campaign. What was always interesting to me was how common the overlaps between homebrews on NPCs were. Scouts — everyone seemed to have a Thief/Scout or a Fighter/Scout of some form.

Rick Stump:
Absolutely! AD&D thieves can’t use bows but everyone wanted a Robin Hood type character, so, like you say, Scout classes were everywhere. The Archer and Archer-Ranger from Dragon were very popular for that reason, too.
The proliferation of diviner types, thieves with bows, lightly armored fighters, necromancer types, and so on, proved that people shared a desire to push D&D/AD&D out to the limits but wanted many of the same things.

(2) Were you in contact with early players of D&D and similar games (OD&D, EotPT, Holmes Basic, D&D Basic/Moldvay, etc), and what effect did these people have on your campaign?

Rick Stump:
I had a lot of friends playing different versions. OD&D at first was what you played, but it branched out fast! Basic was very common for a bit, but the original ‘only to 3rd level’ release was limited enough it was more something you added to OD&D or extrapolated. One DM I collaborated with a lot ran Basic after the Expert rules came out and we swapped ideas all the time. He gifted me Isle of Dread for my birthday, but I mainly used the maps from that module for a Traveller game I was running at the time. What I did use were his villains, modified to 1e, and his magic items. He likewise use my weapons, and magic items, and a few monsters.

There was a lot of cross-pollination back then and a lot of it was players dragging spells and items from other campaigns or wanting to play one of the “NPC” classes. It seemed everyone was innovating and playing mix ‘n match. Stuff like a B/X game with the Traveller skill system, or Spell Law from Rolemaster in AD&D (which I seriously considered doing in Seaward for about a year!). I knew one guy running AD&D with a mana points system of his own invention for spell casting. It was the wild west.

MotA:
Even in our isolated gaming world in farm country, there was a lot of innovation, trial, and error to see what worked and what didn’t. Unlike some of Gary’s comments, we wanted to see where the boundaries were in the game, not to break it, not make a Monty Haul of it, or even make a kill factory. That would have made no sense to us. We didn’t have a game store, so B/X and AD&D were our test beds. Even so, there was lots of elbow room there. D&D Basic and AD&D often had monsters unique to one another, so swapping and sharing between systems made sense. Magic items and monsters were usually home brewed first, and rules were tested a lot before any were adopted.

Rick Stump:
Everyone I knew was stress testing the rules. ‘Pushback’ or ‘knockback’ rules to try to force foes around in a melee were common and changing from Vancian magic might have been the most common for a while in the early ‘80’s. In the military in the mid to late ‘80’s you’d have gamers from radically different parts of the country with all sorts of interesting ideas and rules to share and inspire.

(3) Did you see Dragon Issue 26 at the time of publication, or did you hear about AD&D being “locked down” for house rule changes?

Rick Stump:
I heard of it and was able to read the issue not too long after it came out.

The idea that TSR could order us to play a certain way and that changing the rules was forbidden was way too late to mean anything, frankly. And it was very contradictory to the rest of the messages IN DRAGON! The experience was very much ‘don’t change the rules or you aren’t playing AD&D anymore. Now that I’ve said that, here are suggested alternate rules for dragons, a new character class, and 10 new spells’.

I recall thinking even then it was really about tournaments, which most of us didn’t do. The Giants modules had come out previously and most of us viewed them as interesting but very railroady and thought the idea that a king that couldn’t handle the giants was threatening to kill the people he thought could handle them was ridiculous. Plus, good guys fight evil, duh. The linear ‘go here, then the magic handle takes you to step two’ was disliked immensely among my peers. As the tournament modules came out they weren’t really liked with the Slavers modules disliked the most, at least in my circles. They had a lot of ‘And then this happens to the PCs and you can’t do anything about it’ which is very not-D&D to me.

MotA:
Same on “TSR says ‘no AD&D mods for you’.” We just smiled and moved forward.

We also didn’t really get what “railroad” meant until we played the Giants modules. Once you play on a railroad line, you understand. “Oh, but you didn’t go into Room X and do Action Y, that’s why you are unable to beat the Big Bad.”

It was clear that that kind of activity as described was not organic. That’s when I started using modules as settings. Stripped all the background “motivations” from the module and just dropped locations and NPCs into Greyhawk. If a rumor came up about something related to the Giants, the players could investigate, but it didn’t have to be Drow related or something similar to what was in the module’s text.

(4) Were you ever an RPGA Member at any level? Did you participate in convention play at any period of your 47(?) year history in AD&D gaming?

Rick Stump:
I did a little tournament/convention play in the mid-80’s and more in the late ‘90’s, although mainly played non-D&D games in tournaments. I never cared for ‘tournament D&D’ very much because it felt a lot more like a stage play than an RPG. If I have marks to hit and a script to read, I’ll do that without pretending the dice have any meaning, thank you.

Way back when there was an opportunity to become a Lifetime RPGA member and I was told I was almost gifted that for my birthday. Some of my friends joined and their experience convinced me I was glad not to join. While thousands of players all around the country with hundreds of DMs sharing a big world with scoring, points, and so on seemed fun, it seemed pale compared to a real campaign. When I learned that you were given (effectively) quests and such (‘your character must participate in at least X number of tournament/RPGA modules or you lose points’ and ‘you are running out of time units and soon your character will be locked out until the next RPGA playing year’) I concluded it would only distract me from actual play.

The real confirmation was when I spoke to a guy in about 2002 who, after very serious RPGA play for years had had the highest scoring/ranking/level ranger in his RPGA region told me he really struggled to play D&D in a usual weekly group afterwards. Very anecdotal and personal, but it seemed to match what I had seen elsewhere.

(5) What about the continuing discussion about “Rules As Written” or “RAW”? How did you approach the rules of AD&D or even other RPGs?

Rick Stump:
The advice I have been hearing and giving since 1977 is ‘thoroughly read the rules, play as close to rules as written for 8-12 months, then start homebrewing.’ In my experience house rules are effectively inevitable, the way D&D works makes it just happen. The trick for good homebrewing to to admit when a new idea doesn’t work and remove it, change it back, or introduce something else! For example, my first attempt at changing initiative rules sucked, the second try was closer but caused more issues than the fixed, so I kept tinkering. A handful of times I’ve seen a DM more wedded to his house rules than to good play and it always ends badly for the campaign.

MotA:
Agreed. Learn and practice the rules as RAW, then apply RARW (Rules As Re-Written) via development, play test, and review. If the rule breaks the game, or it doesn’t flow properly, then revert back to the RAW element. Spell Points were my questing beast for some time, then I said Vancian is just a bit more elegant and less math to track. There are still plenty of places for homebrew innovation inside AD&D and other RPGs without game breaking effects.

Thanks again to for his insights and participation!

With that, we close on another episode!

Later, folks!

Intro Note 2: I want to foot stomp that for those of my readers who have never heard of or read Jeffro Johnson’s “APPENDIX N: The Literary History of Dungeons & Dragons” , it is available in hardcover from Castalia House. This book opened the eyes of many people who had never heard of many Pulp Magazine writers and the literary Pulp fiction “library” that influenced Gary Gygax and others to produce Dungeons & Dragons in order to game in the worlds about which he enjoyed reading. It’s definitely worth owning in hardcover. If you search around on Amazon, you can also buy the ebook for your soon-to-be fully-walled, Amazon-controlled, ebook garden, but why “buy” something you can’t own? Get the hardcover and enjoy Jeffro’s Hugo Award-nominated work without the strings.

From Gary Gygax, Appendix N, Dungeon Masters Guide (AD&D 1st Edition):

“Inspiration for all of the fantasy work I have done stems directly from the love my father showed when I was a tad, for he spent many hours telling me stories he made up as he went along, tales of cloaked old men who could grant wishes, of magic rings and enchanted swords, or wicked sorcerors [sic] and dauntless swordsmen. Then too, countless hundreds of comic books went down, and the long-gone EC ones certainly had their effect. Science fiction, fantasy, and horror movies were a big influence. In fact, all of us tend to get ample helpings of fantasy when we are very young, from fairy tales such as those written by the Brothers Grimm and Andrew Long. This often leads to reading books of mythology, paging through bestiaries, and consultation of compilations of the myths of various lands and peoples. Upon such a base I built my interest in fantasy, being an avid reader of all science fiction and fantasy literature since 1950. The following authors were of particular inspiration to me. In some cases I cite specific works, in others, I simply recommend all their fantasy writing to you. From such sources, as well as just about any other imaginative writing or screenplay you will be able to pluck kernels from which grow the fruits of exciting campaigns. Good reading!”

As a backer of the recently successfully crowdfunded “Winning Secrets”, I was anxious to see “what was what” with the current BrOSR game experiment. The manager had epub and PDF out the door very soon after campaign completion, so I didn't wait long.

Faction play among multiple groups and also faction leaders gifted with high levels, resources, and authority were part of my game play experience over the years (including recently in the last couple years), but it’s never really appealed to me. Mox nix, as not all play styles for everyone, and what goes on at someone else’s table is their business as long as it doesn’t interfere with me and mine.

After the PDF and epub versions of the book were made available, I began to read through the material to get a feel for the state of the BrOSR experiment. Some of the Forward was rather troubling.

Arbiter of Worlds

Designing games, running RPGs, and building worlds

By Alexander Macris

From the Introduction, the purpose of BrOSR Play is summarized. Their goals are:

support a hobby, make scheduling easy, support living, breathing gameworlds full of characters and action, make running a game just as easy as (or easier than) running a character

Let us escape the cycle of failure, one that has swallowed and suffocated this hobby, by identifying the narrow path that holds the only viable future of RPGs.

Well, that’s a bit hyperbolic. All TTRPGs and their future depends on the BrOSR? BrOSR is known for massive kayfabe slinging, so I guess we’ll see what develops here.

The Forward then defines what features are common to what is termed “Conventional Play”

Priority: Players > Campaign > Rules

Mono-party

Pre-determined story or impetus for the mono-party to act

Incidental, static gameworld

This is compared to BrOSR play which is claimed to have the following features:

Priority: Rules > Campaign > Players

Parties of opportunity

Total Player Autonomy

Reactive, responsive gameworld at the center of all campaign activity

All well and good. There are more games today that prioritize plot driven play in the first list, but if that is what people want to play, then that is their table. Certainly it would be good if they understood something of earlier games like 1st and 2nd Edition. The earlier ones are nothing like WotC 3.x1 and WotC 42. D&D 5e actually has some good bones3, after you strip the cruft away, and it can become the basis for a 1E, 2E, or B/X style system with a bit of work4.

The second list is still pretty much the one that I see at 1E and 2E tables and at gaming conventions where these TTRPGs are played, as well as in discussions with convention players after my games. Nothing really unique, but definitely more powerful focus points than the first, which creates a good deal of stress on junior DMs/GMs when they crafting games. WotC’s promotion of “creating stories with interesting plots” is no small part of this anguish that modern DMs/GMs feel.

These distinctions are the difference between a real hobby and a fake “community” whose uniting principle is pretending to play a game.

Wow. Londo Molari vibes here.

Yeah, I’m a huge fan and promoter of the 1E and 2E styles of crunchy play, but what one chooses to have as his hobby is none of this writer’s business, whether AD&D 1E or Chutes & Ladders. If you are a TTRPG player, enjoy your game — whatever it happens to be — and you should keep your opinions about others’ flavors of game enjoyment bottled up.

Priority

Lot of back-and-forth here about how conventional play ignores rules, with no numerators or denominators to show how prevalent that really is. Qualitative analysis with no baseline in reality is not a foundation for a convincing argument.

The rules in various games are different, but they should be consistent within the game so players can anticipate and effectively participate in play. Nothing really new here other than rules should be rules — unless they are rulings with the efficacy of rules — to enhance consistency of play.

Party Focus

The default conventional play assumption is that each session will be played with the same lineup of players controlling the same lineup of characters. This assumption is so widespread and thorough that it has warped the common understanding of the term “party” and is largely responsible for the downstream confusions of other terminology, such as “campaign.”

In conventional play, this mono-party is the de facto center of the universe. … Put plainly, the gameworld is not a world but merely a stage.

Eh. Different games, different focus, different goals. Some people play these games because those are the popular games around them. Those are the games their friends play. Those are the games that people at their school play.

Don’t play those games if you don’t like them. Simple as.

Some have never have experienced 1E play. Ignorance of a game style may be unfortunate, but it isn’t a crime. Pick a starfish and help him out.

In stark contrast, BrOSR play contains no presumptions about who will be present for any session because parties are “strike teams” assembled for purpose from the pool of characters accessible to whichever players show up.

. . .

The important distinction is that characters in BrOSR play must earn their prominence in the campaign world. Each character is at work earning the reputation, XP, and gold necessary to achieve his envisioned fulfillment.

So, Jazz Band Adventuring. Ye Olde AD&D 1E and 2E Model — Multiple PCs and even more henchmen and hirelings for each PC. Yeah, WotC 3.x killed a lot of that and it could help a bunch of 5e gamers if their DMs could introduce Jazz Band and Accurate Timekeeping.

Player Agency

In BrOSR play, …[t]he players decide which objectives they prefer and strategize about optimal parties and preparations.

In conventional play, the reality-warping presence of the mono-party comes with demands for their persistence and unity. What could have been the organic formation of real alliances between independent and goal-driven characters is reduced to the Getalong Gang.

I won’t discount this as an issue with some newer TTRPG games, and the WotC poison that is inflicted on the DMs do make the players expect that their role is more to be entertained rather than become participants within the event. That probably has less to do with the “mono-party” than not knowing what their role might be in the game as the rules lay it out.

It is sad to reflect on the fact that the vast pool of players brought up on conventional play are hesitant, unassertive, and deferential on the median. It is much more effective to poach board gamers or wargamers than to attempt drawing from this pool.

While my experience is limited to teaching 5e players at conventions how to do 1E play, I’m gonna guess I have vastly more empirical evidence which shows that it’s pretty easy to teach 5e gamers how to game in 1E terms. A fair number of them like it — and they come back for more, based on my annual repeat business.

Gameworld

The gameworld’s role in conventional play is secondary to the mono-party. If a kingdom falls in the east, and the mono-party doesn’t care, did it even really happen? In conventional play, the answer is not so clear.

BrOSR play is dominated in every respect by the primacy of the gameworld.

. . .

In this sense of the word, conventional play “campaigns” don’t even exist. At conventional tables, this foundational term has been twisted into a new meaning obscured by implications of narrative & mono-party spotlighting. A “campaign” in conventional play is smoke & mirrors; behind the curtain, there is a performer loading up his next trick rather than a reliable clockwork mechanism impassively tracking cause & effect.

A reactive, living game world with NPCs that have their own goals, their own lives, and their own agency — each making use of every second of the Game Clock as it ticks, just as the PCs and their associates can. Real consequences for all PCs and NPCs in the game world.

Again, the 1E and 2E model. Well and good.

But, also, no reason at all to disparage those who don’t enjoy this type of play, or are merely ignorant of it. Kayfabe stretched rather thin here.

But in an age where no one reads; where the social fabric is reduced to shreds; where money-making is the only activity men are allowed to engage with seriousness, how are we going to find the time and the will to sit down and take this intimidating tome seriously? Luckily, the BrOSR already conquered this task for us, and their efforts revealed the key elements necessary to achieve Gygax’s grand campaign.

I guess it’s also fortunate that people are still playing this game since 1979 and learned enough along the way to 2026 to remember how to play it. And everyone else doesn’t know what a “game” is.

Chilling.

Whew, lads!

Let’s see which “key elements” are critical to achieve this goal, as it would appear that something — somewhere — was lost and then — rediscovered?

The Secret is Out

[Lots of back-patting ensues. Then the big reveal. —Editor]

It is here we first see the essential reframing “Real D&D is a Braunstein” (explained in detail hereafter) and the call to reject conventional play.

Let’s follow along and see where this strange concept of “Braunstein” appears in the salvation of the TTRPG hobby as well as within the AD&D 1st Edition rules — as written, of course.

Following through the stages of discovery, we can see a complete set of ideas form, acting as a dam to hold back the sludge-waters of conventional play:

a.) Rules As Written (RAW)

b.) 1:1 Time

c.) All-scale Interactions

d.) Campaign as Continuous Braunstein

Finally we come to the discovery by BrOSR members that the above four elements must be simultaneously utilized — remember that word, “MUST” — to produce a “real game.” Not a “fake game.” Not a “pile of sludge,” according to the Forward writer’s tastes. In fact, he goes on to claim that RPGs do not make sense unless these are used.

Strong words. This certainly remains to be proven. Hopefully there is some equally strong evidence to back up these claims.

a) RAW

There are many reasons RAW is the default and the gold standard for interacting with every kind of game. The abandonment of this standard in conventional play has done incalculable damage to the hobby and caused its most natural participants to view it with confusion or even disgust.

Let’s clear up this “RAW is best” thing right off the jump.

1.) You should ALWAYS play any game as RAW (rules as written) at the outset to understand what the rules in the book(s) are, why they exist, and how they work together. This is true for any game system. Any game at all.

2.) You should carefully read through all the manuals several times, taking note of inconsistencies, unclear rules, text issues (spelling and grammar), and any other issues that relate to the rules and to play.

3.) You MUST fix the inconsistencies that you find in the rules with your rulings, and you MUST be prepared to fix rules or other issues with more rulings as you learn and play the game. Game creators may have a website of official fixes or work-arounds for many of these. Check many sources that discuss the game and these issues. Interact with players who have similar concerns.

Now you are doing Rules As Re-Written (RARW), just as Gary intended! What do we mean by this? We mean that the existing rules in the AD&D 1st Edition three core manuals are not free of contradictions.

Here’s a freebie for those playing our home game.

To add further insult to the injury of RAW, we have the Players Handbook “weighing in” as well on magic armor.

But, wait! There’s more!

Wow. So much for RAW out of the box! BTW, Gary & Co. addressed many of those rules questions and answered at least some in the pages of Dragon Magazine. Strong indication that Dragon Magazine is also part of the core rules, at least for clarifications and corrections.

So, we find that . . .

Other items like this are discoverable on close reading. Have fun, O Cult of RAW.

For too long, conventional play norms have permitted game-runners to view their RPGs as game-building toolkits or storytelling machines; and “designers” have not hesitated to muddy the waters by creating “games” with this explicit function. This mass confusion is the source of rampant DM fiat, Mother-May-I “gameplay,” and passive narrative-driven “campaigns.”

If the games are explicitly designed to be toolkits for building their own ruleset or telling stories, then these DMs/GMs are doing nothing wrong. Design, buy, and play games that interest you and leave the other people to their devices.

In other words, “Lighten up, Francis.”

“The ruleset can answer questions and provide guidance even when everyone at the table feels lost.“

[Quote from Jeffro about the need for consistent rule set in the game.] —Editor: Agreed

[Discussion about how consistent rules allow for analysis of past actions and future decision making by the player.] —Editor: Also agreed, but with a caveat.

As discussed above, no game is ever perfect from the mind of the human designer. Never. RAW games that are played WILL have rulings applied over time.

Period. Dot.

If the original game rule lacks clarity and/or detail, this is a DM/GM fiat decision at the table, or via discussion with the players followed by a DM/GM decision on the rule — exactly what should happen. Either the DM/GM will made a decision on the existing rule, typically based on the clear definitions of the words and their reading of the sentence or paragraphs as written. Then, the DM/GM makes a ruling for future gaming events. He may choose to discuss with players, then make a ruling in regard to clarifying the existing rule.

Ultimately, the standard gaming practice of “because the DM said so” can be invoked with recalcitrant players. Again, the ruling is annotated and play resumes.

This allows the game to be internally consistent and move forward in the future without the speed bump.

For multiple DMs and multiple tables, the ruling can be discussed and debated among other DMs/GMs and an agreed upon ruling can be made and promulgated to all involved parties.

But the most important facet of RAW is its unique ability to provide the shared language and assumptions that allow for play to center around a tangible instance of a game—each member in the roster of an RPG club can participate in the same campaign or “universe” because of a shared ruleset. What conventional play offers instead is only an intangible brand whose very nature is elusive—and the instances of play are isolated to individual tables.

Everyone playing the game RAW is collectively growing and converging in their understanding of the game! When they come together from separate tables, everyone involved is mutually gaining while building the hobby. Meanwhile, conventional play ensures that as a table of players “masters” its bespoke form of play, it becomes increasingly isolated from every other table!

Again, we have a problem assuming that RAW is the unalloyed answer to this question. Even if we assume that the BrOSR answer to missing rules and unaddressed situations in the game is to allow them to be ruled, but all other written rules must be made inviolate, those individual methods of resolution — those individual non-standardized rulings — build up and make each table slightly different over time, unless there is a top-down directed mandate to force these standardized solutions (rulings) onto other tables, the games will diverge.

Where does RAW stop?

In 1st Edition, the core Three Books — Players Handbook, Dungeon Masters Guide, and Monster Manual — were followed by the 1st Edition Deities & Demigods (Legends & Lore), two more Monster Manuals (II & Fiend Folio), Unearthed Arcana (1.5E), the Wilderness Survival Guide, the Dungeoneer’s Survival Guide, and the Greyhawk Adventures — at least. Add to that the official rules for 1st Edition that Gary and TSR released through Dragon Magazine (played a Half-ogre PC of late, anyone? Bueller? Bueller?), and lets not forget the RPGA standardization changes.

Yeah, that trash fire of “standards” — the RPGA. The organization that likely did more to corrupt “rule-based play” for the sake of fees and Association experience points and levels than any number of fictitious 5e players. Thanks, Gary & Co.

[It should also be noted at this point that there are some in the BrOSR community or adjacent to it who actually believe that someone other that Gary and TSR had the responsibility for “preserving the hobby”, when the books have always been available from various locations. They think the older players “failed them” in this respect. Consider the hubris. ]

RARW versus RAW.

RARW always wins if left to its own devices. Not via entropy, but via willful cultivation of the soil.

Thus, only a persistent eye for rulings and incorporating them into every participant’s rules will sustain play over multiple campaigns and gaming tables therein.

Next, it’s time. Namely, 1:1 Time as a “must” for “proper play” of AD&D. This one we are SO gonna kill in its crib. How, you ask? With your grade school Grammar text book, a dictionary, and the US Code of Federal Regulations.

b) 1:1 Time

(AD&D Players Handbook, pg. 39)

Yes, it is so stipulated that timekeeping is critically important in most games of the 1E type. No arguments there. Gary and MANY others around the time 1E arrived on the scene noted that. Lew Pulsipher talked about timekeeping in White Dwarf prior to the PHB hitting the streets.

A sound recommendation from a long-time master in the TTRPG field.

The conventional play norm is to “handwave” (i.e. “let’s just say it happened and move on”) all activity which isn’t explicitly party-focused. Performing this trick crushes all campaign activity into a sequence of tightly-packed “action scenes,” without any room for the gameworld to breathe or react.

That one will be important later. Put a pin in it for now.

What is Gygax’s advice to the game-runner?

(AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide, pg. 37)

“Game time is of utmost importance. Failure to keep careful track of time expenditure by player characters will result in many anomalies in the game.”

Preach it, Gary. GAME TIME is of utmost importance. (My highlight above.)

This next one though is the old chestnut on which the dedicated “you MUST use 1:1 Time if you play AD&D” gamer hangs his hat. The key phrase offered, also on pg 37 of the DMG, is as follows:

“… it is best to use 1 actual day = 1 game day when no play is happening …”

Oh, but that is so brutally edited down. Let’s let it breathe a bit. Let’s get a fuller context quote of that gem.

An even fuller quote for more context. (My insertions are in the square brackets; highlights by your editor as well. Follow along in the text of the DMG on pg 37.)

We have a bit of a conundrum here because Gary is giving out some conflicting information in his example. We may need to apply some RARW to this example before we can interpret it.

The quote goes on from the above with Gary explaining a bit about downtime, adventuring, and travel with seven characters — 6 PCs and 1 NPC. We’ll follow them over the course of 77 GAME DAYS. We even have an image!

Where do we begin with this? Let’s start with the abbreviated quote the Forward’s author has used. Let’s see first if we can determine if the quote mandates 1:1 Time for AD&D 1E play as claimed.

“… it is best to use 1 actual day = 1 game day when no play is happening …”

“…it is best to use 1 actual day = 1 game day …”

“Best” in this sentence is an adverb. The sentence itself is a subjective recommendation by Gary (“best” not carrying any objective value or data, nor is it being called out directly in any way as a RULE) on what he believed to be the optimal choice of using “1 actual day = 1 game day when no play is happening.” That is the same type of subjective recommendation that Lew Pulsipher delivers in White Dwarf Magazine quoted above.

Lew thinks one-week blocks are preferable for measuring wilderness travel.

Gary thinks “1 actual day = 1 game day” is preferable to use.

“Thanks, Gary. I will take your recommendation under consideration.”

1 actual day = 1 game day. This is a Recommendation.

In fact, do we even know what this sentence is trying to say? Consider the rest of the sentence.

“… when no play is happening.”

The group of Players B, C, and D decide on Day 51 not to go into the dungeon and do other things (“resting on their laurels”). Players E and F choose to enter the dungeon on Day 51, return that day, do R&R for Days 52 and 53, then enter the dungeon again on Day 54, succeeding in beating the Level 1 big bad and garnering some loot. Game Day 54 is the end of gaming for the session. At least Game Days 51 through 54 are contiguous in the one session based on the first 2/3rds of the quoted example.

So, if the recommendation of “1 actual day = 1 game day when no play is happening” is in operation, then WHY does the Party start on GAME DAY 55 — the next game day after GAME DAY 54 where they ended the last session — when play at the table resumes the next session, which is four days later, instead of GAME DAY 58?

Why is the “1 actual day = 1 game day” recommendation not being applied here?

If the “1 actual day = 1 game day” recommendation has NOT been applied for this four-day hiatus, then it follows that from the recommendation’s parameters — PLAY IS STILL HAPPENING IN THIS SITUATION.

How could play be still underway? One interpretation is that Gary meant exactly what he said on pg 37 of the 1E DMG:

“GAME TIME is of utmost importance.” —Editor: emphasis mine

Play was ongoing at the table at GAME DAY 51. Player A chose to travel, Players B, C, and D decided to do R&R from GAME DAY 51 through GAME DAY 54, while Players E and F did both dungeon delving and R&R from GAME DAY 51 through GAME DAY 54. Four (real world) days later, the Game Clock STARTS on DAY 55 — the next GAME DAY, per the description given in the first 2/3rds of the quote!

Why GAME DAY 52 is brought up as “Had they come the day after the previous game session, game Day 52 … “ is a clear contradiction of what Gary has presented as earlier data in the example. We are left with that to resolve.

If the first 2/3rds is taken as written, what Gary showed us is an example of “Game Clock as Stopwatch” with this DMG pg 37 scenario, not “1 World Day = 1 Game Day.”

What his parenthetical aside is actually related to is not clear in context of the example, nor is it clear in the simple reading of the text quote when read as a whole.

The parenthetical with the 1:1 Time implication and the latter 1/3rd of the quote with the contradictory GAME DAY information badly muddle the waters of the example.

But, what is clear is that there is no requirement to use 1:1 Time within AD&D 1E, nor is there a requirement to use Game Clock as a Stopwatch. Pick what works for your Game.

A possible scenario for the Real World event shown on DMG pg 37 might involve a single table of 6 players and 1 DM:

DM (Saturday; 1400 Local time): “Ok, you all cleared out the mansion with the wight. It took you 6 game days, but only 5 hours real time—great job. Plenty of gold and jewelry and that silver service was worth a lot. What next?”

Player A: “I want to train for my next level and I have to take my new hench to see my PC’s oracle to confirm the hire. Training first. Maybe some language skills as well.”

[Players B, C, and D lay out what they intend to do—healing, training, some good ale, and the like. All four players are told costs in time and gold pieces, then the DM game time compresses to Day 50 when all tasks are concluded. This takes about an hour of real world time for calculations and updates.

DM (Saturday; 1500 Local time): “Hey, that’s the front door. Must be E and F. Hey, A, let them in, ok?”

[E and F say they had car trouble, but can stay past the 1600 Local time cut off, if the guys are ok with that. A says he has to leave for Church, and B, C, and D are catching a ride with A. A is ok with E and F hitting the dungeon, and B, C, and D say that they will hold off and just go in when the session kicks off again Wednesday at 1300 Local time. The DM tells E and F he can game until about 1800 or maybe even 1900 Local time, so they say goodbye to A, B, C, and D for the day, and that they will be back Wednesday afternoon, since it’s teacher conferences.]

The GAME CLOCK continues to run, as E and F are still at the table, even though the rest have left, after agreeing to let the GAME CLOCK run without them.

DM (Saturday, 1530 Local time): “Ok, you guys travel to the dungeon at 0600 Game Time on Day 51 and arrive at 0800.”

Player E: “We go in!”

[E and F knock around in the dungeon encountering some goblins and a couple gnolls. After taking some hits, they leave, choosing to travel back to town and arriving about 1800 Local. They also choose to rest for two days, get more equipment, and then travel back on Game Day 54, where they get lucky and toast a troll with flaming oil, getting a pair of Gauntlets of Ogre Power, a battle axe +1, and almost 1,000 gp.]

DM (Saturday; 1830 Local time): “Well, that’s it, boys. I’m off to the movies with Mom and Dad. See you in four days — Wednesday at 1300.”

DM (Wednesday; 1330 Local time): “Great stuff on Sunday. We closed on Game Day 54 with everyone back in town but A, who is now traveling to his oracle. We caught up A, B, C, and D with 4 days of Game Time R&R for Game Days 51 through 54. It’s now Game Day 55. What do you want to do?”

Game Time compression can be applied as indicated on the image above, as these are the only 6 players in the game. With game time compression for the PCs, the DM must also allow compression and exploitation of the same amount of game time for all NPCs that PCs were allowed — these are all the interacting NPCs in the PCs’ circles, as well as major factions that have the potential to at some point interact with the PCs.

Reference material on these NPCs are consulted, rolls are made, direction shifts or augments are noted in the DM records, and compression is completed. This might be an hour to several days of DM time away from the table depending on how complex the NPC activities are.

Can you extend this to multiple DMs at multiple tables? Certainly. Little would change if you assumed that Players A, B, C, and D belonged to the DM of the table (let’s call him DM-0 or DM-Prime), while Players E and F are from DM-1’s table. What must be done is coordination between DM-0 and DM-1 as to what magic and other items may enter DM-0’s game world. For an excellent take on this scenario, see ‘s recent post on Cross-Campaign Play.

Now, remember that pin?5 Yeah, that’s how you can do this. Game Clock as Stopwatch is NOT disqualified. DM needs to be busy? Yep. No different than in 1979.

Obviously, with more campaign worlds, more DMs, and more players this effort will require greater coordination and less opportunities for NPC (and perhaps PC) game clock compression. Additionally, close monitoring and timely updates of actual events and GAME CLOCK timestamps for all DMs will be critical for play to proceed with fairness for all involved. Tying the WORLD CLOCK to this structure will also create greater limits on player autonomy, as arbitrarily turning off the GAME CLOCK closes opportunities for play that might be utilized by players of PCs and Patrons. The greatest limitations on player autonomy will be with those structures that require player actions be complete and return to a safe area with resources within a specified window of GAME TIME, that is tied to some ratio of WORLD TIME, or the character arbitrarily dies. This arbitrarily limits travel for in-world exploration and transport of goods and manpower.

The following section of MUST-HAVE discusses what is termed by the Forward’s author as “all-scale interaction.

c) All-scale Interaction

Players in a real RPG must be free to make decisions on behalf of their characters without arbitrary restriction! The constraints present in the game rules exist to support the gameworld as the highest aspirational object—that is impossible if the game designer insists on a myopic focus to inorganically force a style of play on the table.

Summarizing, that means everything from 1-on-1 to small group combat to massed military formation wargames should be playable within the scope of the TTRPG.

No arguments here. The 1E and 2E communities have been doing this from the use of Chainmail and Battlesystem (a dedicated 1E & 2E mass combat add-on) for wargame levels, to standard party combat, to various unarmed combat forms (both in the 1E DMG — RAW!) since its inception.

This isn’t an issue for anyone other than those attempting to standardize for multi-table play on the regular. Don’t care to Patron/Faction play across tables? You are already set, as all this lands on the DM’s shoulders.

For Faction play, all these forms and scales of combat must be standardized with all DMs and all players at the various tables. Once these methods are “RARW normalized” a fair and level rules playing field is established.

Again, timshel.

The big boilermaker looms. The make-or-break of “REAL AD&D PLAY” per the claims — Continuous Braunstein. Will it stand the test?

d) Continuous Braunstein

The Braunstein name and concept originate from a game session constructed by David Wesely. It was a Diplomacy-like setup at the scale of a small town rather than a world war. The rules formalism was light and open-ended—in the spirit of Free Kriegspiel—with Wesely taking on the role of referee and the other players acting as the town residents. The game turned chaotic; Wesely imagined he would meet with the players one by one and then use his interrogations to carefully construct a sequence of resolutions from “complete” information, but the other players plotted and schemed among themselves while he was out of the room, leaving every player (including the referee) in the fog of war.

This evening session so heavily influenced the creation of OD&D that some proclaim Braunstein as the “First RPG” or so on. However, the fruit of BrOSR experiments reveals a different role in the hierarchy of RPGs for the Braunstein.

And some say “First RPG” role is overstated. Opinions differ. The history of David Wesely’s Braunstein is interesting, though. More information on it at the following links.

Grognardia

David Wesely | Wikipedia

Stack Exchange | RPG

Ruins of Murkhill | Forum

What is a Braunstein?

An operational definition is “multiple independent actors operating in conflict under a fog of war.” Seems vague, abstract.

Because it is a vague and abstract concept, and one that typically can turn caustic over time if not well controlled. If you play Diplomacy or Diplomacy-like games, you will quickly understand why they are billed as “games that can end life-long friendships.”

Add in a rules formalism such as the AD&D ruleset. Add in a scenario such as an ongoing AD&D campaign. Now the picture becomes clear.

Here we come to another serious break in “TTRPG Salvation” formalism proposed above:

We aren’t adding Braunstein to AD&D, but we are adding AD&D to Braunstein?

Whatever scrolls your nurd, but how does this save AD&D?

We read on, I guess.

Our “multiple independent actors” could be significant NPCs, factions, and even the player characters. They are “operating in conflict” in the sense of competing for resources and positioning in the campaign state—the source of all alliances, including parties of adventurers, is protection-seeking against the conflicts that naturally arise from campaign events. Each entity in the game acts “under a fog of war” because information is limited by their perspective and the reach of their information-gathering network.

Fine and dandy. A mix of high-level patrons and faction leaders, coupled with lower level parties interacting at various levels, operating at 1:1 Time (1 World Day = 1 Game Day), and things like leveling are going to move like molasses.

How will lower-level PCs ever be able to interact with or contest high-level faction leaders and patrons if they play against this day-by-day advance that never pauses? If you train to go from level 1 to level 2, you can’t play for a significant block of time under this system. Yes, you have other PCs — Jazz Band — but how do you ever pull past the typical Level 6 crest of the hill if you are just a PC in this milieu?

And one has to ask what preparation has the patron player received for managing resources, deploying armies, and managing logistics? Has that player taken a fighter from F1 up through F9, F10, or higher to learn those lessons? To manage the monetary resources needed to move armies, not to mention the logistics necessary to keep them from starving and dying of disease on the way? Keeping his kingdom safe and provisioned during this event?

(All of these concerns are RAW, by the way — Game of Logistics.)

Again, we’ll read on.

Retroactively, “BrOSR” has come to be interpreted as “Braunstein OSR.”

We’ll call it a “Brostein”, just to avoid confusion. Alright, Bruce?

The BrOSR’s most revolutionary (and universally applicable) contribution is the usage of Braunsteins as tools to manage ongoing campaigns. Jeffro Johnson’s incisive observations on this point merit great credit. His insight into AD&D’s intended method of play led directly to Braunstein applications—and to finding a deeper historical unity between AD&D and its predecessor games.

So we’ve added Brosteins to manage AD&D, even though all the rules are in RAW — already in the game? How is this at all “RAW”? We soldier on.

(Braunstein Play is Fundamental to D&D)
April 19, 2024

If you use 1:1 time, then your campaign becomes a type of Braunstein that is spread out over time. It becomes possible to easily integrate the activities of multiple tables, independent name-level characters, even the events of large-scale wargames. … Wesely had to wing it because the idea was half-baked. But if you set up a Braunstein session, you can just use your AD&D manuals to adjudicate everything.

Uh, so AD&D is the tool used to salvage the Braunstein Brostein concept now?

The combination of 1:1 time and total player autonomy naturally forces a campaign into a “Braunstein spread out over time” instead of one stuffed into a night’s session.

Wait, now the Brostein is changing the way that AD&D is played outside the scope of the RAW concept.

Wha…? So, we’ve now suicided one of our Four Pillars. RAW is dead.

AD&D is a toolkit for managing Braunstein interactions.

And we’re back to AD&D driving a Brostein activity.

Can we make up our minds here and agree on a rule set?

Conventional play ignores this entirely. Most D&D campaigns focus on the antics of a single party. When they reach a sufficiently high level, both those characters and the “campaign” itself are retired. This approach is a dead end because it has lost the concept of Braunstein.

Presuming the conclusion by inferring the Braun— er, Brostein was lost, without showing it was there in the original AD&D 1E game structure in the first place.

STAAAHHP!

Gygax created the AD&D manual as an instruction set designed to handle the fruits of the Blackmoor campaign, which descended from Wesely’s Braunstein session. This insight explains almost all of the “inscrutable or bewildering” elements ignored by those that would fail to produce worthy successors of AD&D.

Ah, we’ve come to THE conflation. The claim that there is a direct causal chain between Wesely’s Braunstein, Arneson’s Blackmoor, and Gygax’s TSR games, specifically, AD&D 1st Edition, and that causal chain was intended by Gygax to preserve and extend the Braunstein concept.

Evidence that this was Gary’s stated intent for TSR game development is found . . . where?

Finally, the “ask” comes. “Please play it OUR way.”

But what would happen if we put reins on the tiger we’ve been riding? What would happen if we used the Braunstein concept directly as a tool of intervention?

Sometimes your D&D session focuses on a dungeon delve. Other times it’s a wilderness journey. Sometimes you resolve a titanic miniatures battle that will change the face of your game world. You move between these play modes without thinking about it. Braunstein deserves the same type of treatment.

Braunstein deserves to be a first-class element of a continuing campaign.

It may be “timshel”, but it sure ain’t “shall.”

This has now devolved into “it deserves to be in the game” instead of “it has been empirically demonstrated that it IS in the game — and here’s the data and analysis.” This pillar has never been standing there to save anything in the first place, much less rescue AD&D 1st Edition.

This “continuous Braunstein” is a Recommendation, not a Requirement.

As a player of AD&D 1E or any TTRPG, you don’t have to accept this.

Wrapping this up, AD&D stands on its own without need for Braunstein or Brostein. AD&D can probably stand with Brostein inside/outside/mixed in with it. Guess we’ll see.

Now, that doesn’t mean you cannot play it the way described by BrOSR, but you don’t have to do that. You don’t need to do that. And, you shouldn’t be shamed into believing you are wrong for not doing it the Brostein Way.

Shake off those chains!

The BrOSR Boys can have their fun, and you can have yours, with both of you playing Gary’s AD&D 1E — RARW, Game Clock preeminent, full-featured living-and-breathing world, and customized how YOUR DM (and maybe you) choose it to be.

GAME ON!

If you’ve tried searching for a specific book on Project Gutenberg of late, you may have seen this notice pop up in your browser window instead of the results you wanted.

Busy, busy, busy little server! No time to answer your search request. “I’m too busy serving up something to a dozen bots who can’t comprehend it, and they are gobbling up your ability to read and comprehend what you were seeking.”

Sign of the times. So, are you stymied? Turns out, no you are not. As long as you have a little hard drive space (or a lot of it, depending on your mood) to install some software.

What software, you ask?

Why, Kiwix, says I.

This is an Open Source downloader and viewer that can display the contents of compressed files (in the Kiwix .ZIM format) for offline file browsing. Kiwix has captured a good number of sites, or portions thereof, that you can download and browse at your leisure without need of an Internet connection.

There are mobile versions, PC (Linux and Windows) versions, and Mac versions available, and you can also install Kiwix as a server application and make a browsable home library available via Wi-Fi or Wired connections, if you so choose.

If you have a SD card or internal drive with at least 210 Gb of free space, you could carry all of Project Gutenberg on your mobile device. Imagine that! Searchable and readable from within the app. Not only Project Gutenberg, but a host of other offline library modules are available to you, limited only by your hard drive capacity.

Check their Catalog for the full range of items for download and browsing offline.

ITEM 2. Computer Operating System (OS) level Age-Verification & Identification mandates.

These laws and regulations are being pushed by various States and “Silicone Valley” techbros, ostensibly to “protect the children.”

That lie just gets SO old, it hurts.

It’s really to track people on line and find out what they do, likely for commercial purposes, but possibly for political ones as well. Meta — your Facebook overlords — have dumped millions of dollars into these age verification mandate efforts, probably because the ads they sell are being targeted by their own (and other Silicone Valley companies’) spam bots. Any bets that Alphabet (Google Ads) might be in the same boat?

Computer ID? That’s to help the bots target real people over other bots, not to help protect kids. Follow the money as always.

Various operating systems of the Linux kind are refusing to comply, regardless of how the laws roll out. One distribution even suggested they may build a “1984 Surveillance State Edition” in case you live in the Peoples’ Republic of California or the Deutsche Demokratische Republik (Colorado Region.)

If you want to find a Linux distribution that might fill the “NO ID/NO AGE VERIFICATION/NO TRACKING to use my computer” bill, you can follow this page to see which distros are falling on the Refusnik side, and which are bending the knee.

”Does It Age Verify” GitHub Page

Me? I’m a Devuan user from the “systemd refusnik” era. It serves me well.

ITEM 3. Independent Comic Book Creators to Watch and Follow.

Hey, comic books are supposedly one of the big reasons why I’m here, right? Let’s list some folks I follow, in no particular order. Please check out their comic work and their writing/podcasting. Guaranteed I’ll miss some, but this is a start:

1. and at Heroic Adventure Fiction, where they post chapters of their books from their shared-world adventure stories and a good deal of Shell’s artwork.

2. posts at K.M.’s Substack where she shares posts from her novels and also her comic book pages from her novels-become-comics.

3. is at Comics Odyssey with his ongoing Spirit-Girl series.

4. at Tales of the Earthbound, who is getting ready to launch his fundraiser to get his graphic novel into physical form. Henry also podcasts with Ulysses, so check them out.

5. at Novels, Comics, and Webcomics has a history of producing intellectually stimulating comics, and she does a killer set of Batman Beyond fan fiction stories.

That’s enough to get readers started. Please visit these fine people and read some of their writing and analysis, and enjoy their art.

That’s all for now!
Later, folks!

Spread the happiness all a’ round!

[Substack has likely already warned you of this, but the following post is — as usual — WAY too long for most e-mailers. Please view in your favorite browser or the Substack app. — MotA]

Comic books — the physical 32-page saddle-stitched “floppy” — are more and more becoming a thing of the past. Despite advances away from the 4-color press printing on newsprint (pulp paper), despite the incredible range of color available rather than the limited 40-tone palate, despite ownership by multi-billion-dollar valued companies who can hire the top tier creatives, the floppies are fading into the sunset like a 1930s movie cowboy in his closing scene.

True, graphic novel compilations and digital copies of comic books are replacing the floppy, but at much lower numbers than existed in the past. Hidden digital sales numbers and website archive views aren't real until revealed in an manner that can be audited. The Big Five Lumber Mills already poisoned that well, Marvel and DC, so we will assume you are lying about your numbers until proven otherwise.

And, finally, despite their protestations to the contrary, with two perennial exceptions, Marvel and DC comic book titles are experiencing something akin to what Hollywood’s movies are experiencing with their viewing public.

That thing would be “indifference.”

Why are people becoming indifferent?

One reason: the lack of verisimilitude in stories.

Let's define it.

Verisimilar is defined by Merriam-Webster as

1. having the appearance of truth; probable

2. depicting realism (as in art or literature)

Verisimilitude is then the quality or state something of appearing or feeling to be true or real, or essentially — to be believable.

Every story told must have verisimilitude.

That ranges from the factual description of historical naval encounters, to the mathematical development of esoteric physical theories, to the fables and fairy tales we tell to children. You have to be able to believe in the world that is introduced to you by the author and within which he asks you to travel in his story.

Verisimilitude must always exist for the reader.

Otherwise, the reader will be thrown out of the story again and again as he encounters the speed bumps of doubt, disbelief, craziness, mismatches in world-building, and other elements that do not have the “feel” of fitting with the story as presented.

That willingness to believe on the reader’s part requires a mutual agreement between writer and reader that the writer will craft a story that is internally consistent with the rules the writer has created. Elements of the story must conform to an internal logic. This logic may be very simple or incredibly complex, but it must have a consistency to it that the reader is willing to follow and accept. Essentially, the reader will typically go along with the writer’s premises as presented, as long as those premises remain “true” throughout the story.

I believe that one element responsible for the miserable failure of mainstream comic books is the inability of modern writers to properly address verisimilitude in comic stories and apply it in the correct manner to the characters and their environments. Some of this issue comes with the baggage of limited imagination in modern mainstream writers—not all, but too many. Lack of reading stories or books outside a highly prescribed scope. [Yes, US Public Education System, I am looking at you.]

There is also an unwillingness to address characters as they were historically imagined and presented, a drive to inject stories with political ideologies antithetical to entertainment of its consumers, and an unwillingness broaden personal views enough to understand character morals and ethics that differ significantly from the writers’ personally-held beliefs.

What the reader is willing to accept for verisimilitude in a story has changed over time, specifically in the way of how science, philosophy, and social elements are interwoven into a story. In my view, the “correct” amount of verisimilitude to be used in the creation also depends upon the type of character presented to the reader.

As an example, a hard boiled private eye in a 1940s film noir setting would break verisimilitude if he suddenly threw off his topcoat and hat to reveal a Buck Rogers jet pack on his back and ray pistol strapped to his hip, then flew off after the criminal mastermind. The author would be violating the standing agreement with the reader of the story unless these things were somehow foreshadowed or hinted at in the previous chapters of the story. Some level of Mythic or Futuristic elements were needed to prime the pump, as it were.

The creators have to be honest with the readers. That kind of shock shown above could throw a reader out of the story, and it might just cause him to not return.

This is where the Superman-Batman dichotomy exists for me.

Superman lives in a world of Myth and Wonder, where his adventures are larger than real life, but anchored enough that a reader might enjoy them despite a bit of unreality. His abilities defy many of the known laws of physics, but so do the machinations of many of his adversaries, such as Lex Luthor. Superman’s adventures must have enough verisimilitude to allow for “you will believe a man can fly” within the context of the stories. Many Superheroes fall into this Cosmic-level category: Captain Atom, Green Lantern, The Spectre, Thor, Martian Manhunter, Doctor Strange, and many others.

• These heroes are closer to the super-normal characters of Myth, Legend, Fantasy, or Fairy Tales with the level of power they can command. The Elder Edda, Gilgamesh, and Grimm’s Fairy Tales territories combined with tales of Roland, Ivanhoe, and Cú Chulainn.

Batman is a character who is closer to the reality we experience daily, dealing with some issues that we see in real life or ones that we could image occurring in our world. He can perhaps tolerate more injections of “Reality” than Superman can. The Street-level Superheroes include: Daredevil, Punisher, Nightwing, Black Canary, Nick Fury, Blue Beetle, Judo Master, and other near-normal characters. While these characters can employ some Buck Rogers tech at times, we don’t typically need to bend the known laws of physics to tell one of their stories.

• These heroes are essentially the Pulp Adventure heroes or the extraordinary exemplars of sports and the various militaries of the world. The Shadow, The Spider, Sam Spade, Sherlock Holmes, Miss Marple, Alan Quatermain, James Bond, and other adventurers, detectives, scientists, and masters of various human skills fall into this category.

We thus have two Superhero Classes in need of Verisimilitude “application” based on their proximity to our Reality. These are:

• Cosmic-level Superheroes

• Street-level Superheroes

The $64 question that then faces us is: how does a creator successfully intermingle the Cosmic-level Superheroes with the Street-level Superheroes and maintain verisimilitude within the story?

• The Silver Age solution was to bring the Street-level Hero into the Cosmic-level Hero’s world.

• The Modern Age solution is typically to pull the Cosmic-level Hero into the Street-level Hero’s world.

Both can work, but both types of characters must be accommodated to preserve their verisimilitude when they step into the other’s space.

World’s Finest Comics -- Superman-Batman team-ups -- in the 50s, 60s, 70s pre-Crisis era leaned into letting Batman move into Superman’s world for an episode or an adventure, letting Batman and Robin participate more in the Myth and Legend realm. Consider this array of World’s Finest covers. Note the general trend and feel of the stories as presented to the reader.

The Brave and the Bold featured team-ups with Batman and another Superhero for much of its run. Note the themes partnering with Street-level Superheroes vice partnering with the Cosmic-level Superheros. Both focused on the Street-level world, then added Mythic elements as needed for the story to progress.

Street-level team-ups.

Cosmic-level team-ups.

Post-Crisis on Infinite Earths, and in subsequent “resets” of the DC Universe in the comics, Superman and other Cosmic-level superheroes tended to be drawn into Batman’s world of the Street-level Superhero. Writers worked to make unreal abilities make sense in the world of normal abilities, typically using our Reality as the guide, along with its explanations for Science and Technology.

The problem in this case is when the writer attempts to make the Cosmic-level character fit into the Street-level World with less-than-complete understanding on their part of the concepts they incorporate into it.

Typically, what they create is not real enough.

Little or no considerations is taken of the writer’s explanations for why and how the Cosmic-level Superhero’s abilities exist and their ramifications. This can lead to — stupidity.

Verisimilitude-breaking stupidity.

Consider the reboot of Superman. From the 1986 Man of Steel, we have this exchange:

Not being able to tell the difference in various dumbbell weights means that Superman will be breaking off doorknobs, smashing glassware, and crushing bones during handshakes. He’d also be unable to use a typewriter or keyboard without obliterating them, couldn’t dress himself without tearing his clothes, and couldn’t accomplish any number of other normal daily tasks. Don’t let him rescue any kids or cats!

No thought at all was put into that story claim’s ramifications.

Sorry, Mr Byrne, but this one still rankles me. A lot. A LOT.

As long as we’re here, there’s this from later issues of Superman:

“I WILL MOVE IT — WITH MY MIND! “

Grief.

Just say NOTHING about it—at all! He’s SUPERMAN, for cryin’ out loud! That’s enough for readers, even for 1986 readers! This exposition on Superman’s powers and any number of background elements runs rampant in this series. Verbal diarrhea doesn’t keep your readers engaged. It’s just useless words covering the pictures. Where is the editor?!

Verisimilitude breaking.

This is why I still consider The Original Captain Marvel from Fawcett Comics to be superior to Superman. He just did stuff. No blathery, pseudo-scientific fluff and nonsense. Look at that dude—things just get done!

SHAZAM!

But Superman today has little in common with Batman.

Their worlds don’t mesh anymore because Reality for modern writers now stands in the way of injecting Myth and Fable into stories as needed. The Superhero Trope runs on Myth and Mystery and the long history of Storytelling. Many apparently have no background in Myth and Storytelling. They run on the fuel of “their Reality”, and it shows.

Materialism is their fuel. But, without Myth, Materialism will run out of gas before you get 2 miles out of town.

Since many Modern Writers are Materialism-based, they work hard to suck the Myth out of Story wherever it is found, whether intended or not. That began long before the 21st Century. In the world of Comic Books, that was likely the result of Marvel and DC being corporatized in their sales to conglomerates in 1967 and 1968.

The results are a matter of history.

[As an aside, due to my often acerbic tone regarding Denny O’Neil, I am compelled to say that I had and currently have no hard feelings against him as a person. Those who knew him reported him to be a staunch friend and good fellow in general. His politics were not mine. He was entitled to that choice, as we all are. My beef has always been with making Entertainment into what it should not be — political propaganda. His actions helped make that a reality within Comic Books in the 1970s and on into the present.]

Look at Denny O’Neil breaking up the previous classic team of Green Lantern and the Flash — both existing on the Cosmic-level of Superheroes — to weld together Green Lantern and Green Arrow (O’Neil’s self-insert character).

What happened? Green Lantern had to be nerfed hard to be partnered to O’Neil’s the Street-level Green Arrow. Bringing a Cosmic-level Hero down to LARP as a Street-level Hero never really worked, as it felt forced and wrong for Green Lantern to be locked down to Earth. He was one of the great space-faring heroes of DC.

Other O’Neil abuses of Myth:

• Wonder Woman completely nerfed to go on a “spiritual journey” with a pseudo-Eastern religious/philosophical figure that eventually had Gloria Steinem railing against the abuse of the character before O’Neil was dumped and Diana’s powers were returned.

• Superman found all kryptonite on Earth changed to iron, only to exchange it for a sand-being nemesis who sapped his strength until he was almost too weak to stop a stampede of cattle—by lassoing them all and dragging them to a stop. (There’s your Realism.) Mercifully and relatively silently retconned out when O’Neil left Superman.

Oh, so you want Realism, eh? Let me tear your tissue-thin Realism apart with more Reality than you can tolerate.

Consider a quote from a discussion that started me thinking about this post.

Let’s try ‘Religion and Realism’ for 100, Alex.

“For instance, I’m so old that I remember when wonder Woman was a super-human princess, before she got retconned into being a (demi?)god.”

It’s not becoming a demigod that’s the issue. It’s that the writer likely has no background for understanding the implications of that change. The world he’s working in is trying to be made “real”, but it’s not real enough. Not by half.

There would be no atheists (honest ones, at least) in either Marvel or DC. Various pantheons of gods, cosmic entities that mimic gods, and just-plain thoroughly unexplained phenomena abound. Eye-witnesses are numerous, and many of them experts in their fields and trained observers and/or scientists. Cross-overs between dimensions pit sorcerous powers against technology, or even take over tech for their own purposes.

Where is the religious schism (or schisms) within worshipers of actual deities from myth-become-real because their god lost last week to the demigod from Pantheon X? Temples and churches: where are Wonder Woman’s worshipers if she’s a demigod? Worshipers of Thor vs Hercules rioting in the streets, and what about the rest of the cosmic beings that will capture the attention of many of the crystal enjoyers? What about real-world religions? How do they factor into this? How do they respond? Which heroes align with the various religions, our world and the story world, since we are shooting for ‘real’?

Zach Snyder had some of this right in his Superman films with people worshiping the Kryptonian man-god among men. Batman and Mr Teriffic aren’t going to be confident Atheists in this world, despite what any given encyclopedic product from DC says—not if they are at all honest.

With actual Realism inserted, you need to consider 2nd, 3rd, 4th order effects and beyond. Political powers would be heavily involved with any activities Superheroes engage in that affects their domains. The Military. Banks. Police and Sheriffs Departments. Churches and religious groups. Entertainment. Social media. Corporate interests. Fan clubs. These and many more are going to “have a say” on how your ‘realistic heroes’ exist in the story.

Right. Just to take the least absurd detail to talk about, Santa Claus is objectively real in both Marvel and DC.

And the “myth” feels wrong, doesn’t it? Not him visiting Darkseid or Doctor Doom, but Santa “existing” even if for some one-off humor. You’ve likely made Darkseid and Doom feel LESS real within their own worlds in this case, since Santa Claus was sneaked into them as a quirky insert for questionable humor.

And what else came along with Santa?

Not a myth, not a fable, not "the personification of generosity", not "Merry Old England's Father Christmas in red instead of green", not "sinterklaas” as re-imagined by Washington Irving and Clement Moore when they tried to tone down the Dutch Christmas celebrations because it was too raucous a party for the puritan likes of them". Actual, factual, St. Nicholas.

Not least because if Santa is real, is Der Krampus? What about the Christmas Witch and her Yule Lads? Yule Cat?

Yes. None of it is real enough to accommodate what the creators want as the baseline reality in their story world. Even Santa Claus has more baggage than you can pull in — or wish to pull in — especially if there is baggage that you wish to exclude due to its potential uncomfortable ramifications to your world.

Again, your world is likely not REAL enough in this case.

Why in all 9 hells would St. Nicholas give presents to Darkseid?!

And as you said, the writers never bothered to even think about what the 2nd and 3rd order effects would be, much less actually talk about them.

Yes. You have to tie the myth of St Nicholas to the myth of Darkseid. Even if your world is now dipping into Imaginary Stories or Multiversal Worlds, i.e., pure mythic fantasies, your world is not real enough for it to work without the whole baggage train of Santa Claus coming along for the ride. You have to try to exclude the uncomfortable bits of reality you don’t want to exist there or to be addressed.

But, your reader is likely bringing the baggage train. Sometimes all of it.

And that is almost always verisimilitude breaking. If your use of Santa doesn’t jibe with the reader’s view of Santa, you may have a potential loss on your hands. Maybe your story isn’t as well received, maybe it gets a smile or a smirk, and maybe it gets put down unfinished.

Risk.

Why are most of Marvel and DC not really Superheroes today? In my view, modern creators lost the ability to understand Myth, Fable, and Story. They mostly don’t comprehend why the story needs to be linked to Reality, but not of Reality. They can’t grok the Superhero Trope.

Verisimilitude.

“In the world, not of it.”

A wise man gave me a quote that sums up this verisimilitude thing quite neatly and completely, and not just for comic books.

The error is simple: comic books must have verisimilitude. Bad writers think this means realism. Really bad writers think realism means nihilism.

—

Imagination is sorely lacking among writers if they want “realism” in their characters. There are already significant, unexplored paths the creators can travel.

• If Green Lantern has his Power Ring, why hasn’t he used it to influence radio, streaming, and satellite broadcasts on telecommunication devices via his known mental domination abilities and forced every criminal on Earth to surrender to police or other authorities and confess their crimes?

• Why haven’t Superman, Captain Atom, Martian Manhunter, or the Flash used their powers to surreptitiously harvest evidence on these same criminals and anonymously turn it over to the authorities/police?

Writers apparently think inventiveness = deviousness, therefore heroes can’t be inventive. Hardly realism at play. Hardly real at all.

Many modern writers write heroes as reactive, not proactive. If you knew -- in REALITY -- you had 10 deadly enemies on the hunt for a way to kill you, or take over the world and then kill you, you'd be looking very hard for them.

I will say: the only time when I believe that Super Dude doesn't just use his miraculous alien ubermensch powers to solve all crime everywhere is when it is presented as a moral choice:

“I can stop a crime, but I cannot change a heart. True redemption comes only from the internal desire to change, which I cannot impose from outside."

And even then, such justifications do not stretch as far as it would take to forgive the Joker for beating your partner to death with a crowbar.

You had some of the real reaction to the revolving door of escalating super-crime in Mark Waid’s Kingdom Come.

Joker kills everyone at the Daily Planet, then gets killed by a vigilante Superhero, because the authorities that should punish Joker have let this type of revolving-door justice system farce continue too long. Waid trips over himself to show that somehow this vigilantism is wrong because these heroes then go on to hunt other super-criminals, and then corner the Parasite who somehow kills Captain Atom, thus irradiating Flyover Country.

So, killing bad, m’kay?

In the real world with “real” Realism, the vigilantes would come if the system let nuking a building happen without severe consequences. These would be the Baron Frankenstein villagers who would empty Joker’s rainbow skull of flavors all over the pavement. They also would deal with any similar threat to the general public in similar terms if the authorities balked.

If the authorities complied, then threats too powerful for the vigilante mobs of normal human would be dealt with by the world’s militaries and police forces in the same brutally efficient manner.

Superhero vigilantes would deal with super-powered villains of the Joker’s ilk in a similar fashion if we are talking REAL real-world Reality. Murderers and mass murderers would be hunted down and eliminated if they could not be held or reliably contained. That’s history talking. Real world stuff.

Real Realism.

REALISM.

Well, this would have been too real for Waid’s world. His comic book realism couldn’t handle that much Reality, so vigilantism was condemned and — and then villainy went on? Except, hero-versus-hero villainy? Too much ‘good’, I guess? Shades of old Dragonlance modules!

Modern day writers would flinch at this much Realism — this much REALITY — in their stories. But, that also kicks open the door to the real Realism just making the comic book stories a reflection of the real world. Another news program with fantasy characters.

… and the entertainment value is thus rapidly draining out. And, wasn’t the entertainment why we were here in the first place? We already have a CNN and Fox News and other more timely and reliable news sources.

If that’s all comic books become, then why bother with them?

Summarizing a few of the BIG verisimilitude breakers I’ve experienced over the years:

• Creator’s Politics, Ideology, and Philosophy heavily overlaid on the story—which sours faster than warm milk. Current year politics will be forgotten in months or years, making the story less comprehensible as time from the event increases. Better to use general political elements of the period as backdrop—not as a stick—for successful uses of politics in stories. The big thing to remember is readers are in it for the Entertainment, and they typically don’t give a damn about your political stances. Go join a political action committee or a protest, Boomer.

  • Examples of rank and dismal failure in my regard include Steve Gerber, Steve Englehart, Alan Moore, Denny O’Neil1, Warren Ellis2, and any number of Post-Silver Age modernist writers. Almost all their politically-charged digs come off as a wet fart in a school auditorium—both unwelcome and juvenile.

    • “Oh, we’re making fun of Politician X here.”

    • “Oh, we’re angry about real-world Policy Y here.”

    • “Oh, we’re propagandizing Political Cause Z here.”

  • Does this cover look like something that fits into “Entertainment” or “Political Posturing”? I know I’d avoid it like the plague, even if I didn’t know who wrote it.

• Steve Ditko answered a good many of his contemporaries within Amazing Spider-Man and in Charlton’s Blue Beetle regarding putting politics in comic books.

• Explaining the Myths or Fudging the Tech (Cartoon Theology/Bad Science). Poor research makes creators look stupid. Santa Claus without background or fake background, or attacks on religion or attempts to erase the religion which spawned Santa Claus typically fall flat. Don’t be dull, creators. Be interesting. Attacking millennia-old religions isn’t interesting, and as a Materialist, you probably don’t have mental horsepower for that task.

  • Unfortunately, Who’s Who in the DC Universe and The Handbook of the Marvel Universe both exist. Horrific pseudo-scientific explanations abound, primarily written by Humanities majors who avoided STEM like it was a leper colony, with little or no inkling about 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order effects. Then, some other writer wants to use this garbage to explain something in one of his stories. Please, stop.

  • Recommendation from a physicist who reads a lot of Pulp and new Indie works: if you don’t know the science, and you don’t NEED to explain it, then don’t. ”It just works that way” is going to be a better explanation in most cases than sounding ignorant and/or stupid to readers who might know more than you do. Explain as little as you can get away with explaining. Glaring errors in real-world science/technology explanations may kick readers out of the story, and may also lose you the reader.

  • The writer, in attempting to make his world more REAL—to make it more believable to readers, may find that added real-world detail works almost in reverse of the intent. If the readers see through your bluff, then you are toast. TIP: you probably can’t make your world REAL ENOUGH for this to work, as evidenced by the following examples:

    • DC’s explanation of quantum mechanics and supposed links to Buddhism in early Captain Atom issues is really bad Pop Science that shows little to no understanding of the Science, but rather what New Age science book has bubbled into the NY Times Bestseller List last month. It also screams “lazy hack”.

    • Attempting to sell Magneto as a link between the forces of ‘Electricity’ and ‘Magnetism’, when ‘Electromagnetism’ was a Fundamental Force since before the writer of that text was born is a laughable failure of basic research.

    • Any of various attempts to explain the ‘thermodynamics’ and ‘metabolic processes’ of Superheroes have been and are still completely cringe. Please, just stop. I’m begging you. Stop. Now.

• Visual 4th Wall breaking—very few can accomplish this successfully, and it’s usually successful through humor. The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis and the Sensational She-Hulk comic (1989, John Byrne issues) are two notable exceptions that did it pretty darn well, but it also gets old pretty darn fast if the creators aren’t good at situational humor or self-effacing comedy.

Concluding this rambling post, we sum up:

• Readers want Entertainment; write or create to Entertain your audience.

• Readers want believable stories and settings, so creators need to strive for verisimilitude in their works, regardless of genre or format.

• Verisimilitude is not Realism & Realism is not Nihilism; understand the difference between these things or fail as a creator.

That’s all until next time, Folks!

[Prompted by the post below and other recent posts by . Check out his Substack.]

Kairos on Substack

Hollywood’s Ongoing Identity Crisis

Hollywood’s identity crisis didn’t begin with a single box-office bomb. And it can’t be explained away by appeals to a bad release calendar. Instead, what we’re watching unfold is the long tail of a deeper failure: an industry that no longer understands its purpose and is trying to fill the void with desperate spending…

Read more

6 months ago · 10 likes · Brian Niemeier

=== *** ===
The unmitigated joy in watching modern Hollywood burn to the ground as Silicon Valley takes the once-mighty movie and television studios as their playthings may be something akin to Nero fiddling while Rome burned, and should probably cause shame.

Nope. No shame here.

I remember when Hollywood was able to generate entertaining fare for the general audiences. You didn’t have to align with political stances of the writers, actors, or directors. You didn’t have to check to see if the movie was “not made for you”.

Not so anymore. The hate is palpable in too many products that Tinsel Town creates today. And that hate isn’t always directed at the people that the creatives claim for the access media and their political allies.

Think about what Hollywood produces these days. Remakes, reboots, sequels, and various derivative works from intellectual properties that are often creations of the World War periods — both of them. But the Boomers and Gen-X Generations are slowly fading into the mist. Do the Millennials and the Zoomers care about these properties with the same vigor?

The push for key jangling cameos and “memberberries” in films is directed to the audience to draw them in with the familiar, only to surprise them with the repurposed skin suit to cover lesser or even completely new works. The general audience appears to be less and less receptive these days to that old wolf-in-sheeps-clothing dodge.

Evidence: Pay attention to the number of tickets sold as well as the box office takes.

Netflix — a very mature company on the top end of the profitability sigmoid — wants the younger generations chained to a screen. To be fair, the same can be said of any other streaming service. Not meeting friends in a theater, not walking somewhere, not talking to others in person — GET. ON. THAT. SCREEN. AND. STAY. THERE!

Har! Too bad, Hollyweirds! Turns out more and more Zoomers are discovering they like old entertainment stuff better than the new, getting off the networks, and touching grass. Seeds of rebellion appear to exist.

Gary “Nerdrotic” Beuchler lays out the state of the tentpole Superhero Movies today in his video below. These have been Hollywood’s only big event money-makers for a decade.

It ain’t good.

Superman 2025 is already the #10 movie of the year, and it was the best performer of the crop for Superhero movie fare for the “Survive until 2025” crowd. Could be that Superman even comes in at #11 or worse by the end of the year.

Normies — the normal non-nerd enjoyers of entertaining things who don’t obsess over stuff like comic books — are checking out of the Superhero schtick. Why? It’s bland, wet, cardboard-like gruel. It’s produced by the same cookie-cutter writing rooms, using the same HR down-directed influence on casting (for actors, writers, and directors), and overseen and manipulated by the same disconnected C-suite denizens who don’t even know what the property is, much less watch it if they did.

“Indifference” is the watchword for “Avengers: Doomsday” and “Supergirl” in 2026 Superhero films.

Warner Brothers — home of DC Comics and the DCU is very much in flux with the bidding war, the announced sale, the proxy battle, the regulatory wrangles that are bound to happen, not to mention if the Legislative or Executive Branches decide to get tangled in this.

So will Netflix (the #1 streamer) buying the WB’s HBO Max (the #3 or #4 streamer) plus the WB IP library pass the monopoly test? Trump is making noises that the answer might be “No.” So are the House and Senate.

Hilarity.

Pass the popcorn!

Do the viewers care? If Netflix and other streaming services are making movies for the secondary streaming market (read: “it’s on in the background while you doomscroll on your phone”), does it matter at all who owns your grandfathers’ IP? Do the viewers care if it’s slop?

Tech Bros are betting the answer is “no.” But let’s face it, there isn’t much left to save in Hollywood. It’s not like there is a good guy and a bad guy here. More like various shades of dark grey.

As Chuck Dixon mentioned to in a recent interview, don’t worry about Netflix making Warner Brothers “woke”. It’s already woke. The system is not about to change because of sales, except for getting smaller with each sale.

An interesting side note to show this was the trajectory for a while, Netflix made rumblings that it had originally planned to buy Disney before WB came up for sale. Apple might now be eyeing it — a Bob Iger fantasy for decades! Who ever buys Warner Brothers, Disney and every other major studio is looking at being gobbled up by the Tech Giants of Silicon Valley. Maybe Paramount eventually buys WB, and then Netflix or Apple buys Disney.

Mox nix.

Expect that sooner than you would like to think all of the well-known properties of Entertainment are locked up on Silicon Valley hard drives in data centers.

Some of the real losers in all of this are the people who work in the industry and the people of California. Jobs are leaving, the prices and conditions to make movies in California and most of the US are too high for studios (debate among yourselves, thank you.) Watch for significant deterioration in Los Angeles over the next decade as it all comes crumbling down on the movie making industry there.

The other losers are all the people who want to enjoy those properties now locked up in streaming services, paying more every year to watch a network-connected screen. Never owning it.

Remember, you are supposed to be happy about this.

The hubris of Hollywood was slowly — now rapidly — killing all of it. It’s a fight to be the last corporate oligarch standing in the Entertainment Industry, which itself is being eaten by Silicon Valley — already engaged in its own Highlander struggle over Artificial Intelligence to be “The One.”

The real amusement is they are all fighting over the last buggy whip factory, demanding to be the owner of the product fewer and fewer people want.

Heh.

What about YOU, the viewer? What do you do if you aren’t in a mood for slop on your phone, pressing down like a boot on your face, forever?

1. Get some physical media of current stuff you enjoy from studios while you can. That window is getting tight, and it’s happening very quickly.

2. Find sources of even older entertainments. Get some hard copies to go with the electrons, and curate that good stuff to watch, read, enjoy.

3. Find independent creators of entertainment — authors, artists, game makers, photographers, film makers — and support their work with your dollars and your eyeballs.

4. Drop the slop. Don’t just watch something to have noise in the background of your other leisure activities, even if that is just doomscrolling. Cut the fiber or WiFi connecting you to the purveyors of grey goo. Ask yourself if what current year Hollywood is producing is actually good for you and for your family. Is what you are putting into your head beneficial for your leisure, for your peace of mind? If the answer is “no”, then get rid of it. “Don’t give money to people who hate you.” This isn’t to harm them. This is to protect you. Don’t put slop into your head if it isn’t healthy for you.

Go find some Indies in books, games, film, or whatever entertainment who are creating for the new generations.

Don’t just sit there on that screen wishing for the old days to return.

They won’t.

And that isn’t a bad thing.

Very short post as a reminder that the Based Book Sale for 2025 is now ongoing through December 1st. Thanks to for his yeoman’s work in putting on this sale where you the reader can discover new authors (and new-to-you authors) whose primary goal with their writing is to entertain you rather than bore you to sleep with turgid slop.

You can find out more about the sale at the link below, along with the list of books on offer.

Based Book Sale

The 2025 Black Friday/Cyber Monday Based Book Sale!

The Holidays Are Here…

Read more

6 months ago · 66 likes · 14 comments · Hans G. Schantz

Update post: over 1,000 books sold at this time. Outstanding!

Based Book Sale

Black Friday Book Deals!

Amazon can be a bit slow updating results, but the Based Book Sale has already placed over a thousand Based Books in the hands - or e-readers - of Based Readers. Here are the interim results after the first two days of the sale…

Read more

6 months ago · 5 likes · Hans G. Schantz

Well, you know the drill by now.

Come get some!

A number of Substack Notes and comments, as well as a recent Discord discussion, has me writing another one of these “hey, you know Microsoft Office 365 isn’t the only game in town” articles. Here we go!

While using the Cloud ( read “somebody else’s computer” or “remote application and data server” ) is all the rage in the Modern Era of 2025, having some locally installed apps can really pull you out of a jam and be a life-saver for your work schedule.

Like when Cloudflare decides its transistors are overheating and it needs a bit of a lie down. “I’ll be back shortly — for various definitions of ‘shortly.’”

Some Free-to-Use and some Open Source examples are provided, along with links to resources to find your own sources of locally-installed application excellence. Be sure to look at the on-site documentation to see if the suggestions fit your use case, file format save/open/export capability, and — while it can be unsexy and boring — read the user license terms.

Applications for Office Use

Office Suites and Stand-Alone Word Processing Apps

• LibreOffice - Locally-installed office suite that comes with word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, vector drawing, mathematical formula creator, and local database functions; saves in its own and many other formats, including PDF export; can be installed on Windows, macOS, and Linux; modifiable with plug-ins for specialty editing or additional features (Open Source software)

• OpenOffice - One of the first Open Source office suites, and the basis for LibreOffice; has similar features to LibreOffice; can be installed on Windows, macOS, and Linux; maintained by Apache Foundation (Open Source software)

• yWriter - A Free-to-Use software editor that is designed by a writer for writing novels, stories, and other structured documents. Version 7 can be installed in Windows, macOS, and on both Android and iOS mobile devices.

• Notepad++ - A powerful Windows-based ASCII text editor which can also edit HTML, C/C++, HEX, and other standard format text documents; Notepad++ can open multiple files at once using a tabbed display, has deletion history features, and generally behaves like Superman under a yellow sun compared to Windows Notepad.

PDF Readers

• Sumatra - lightweight Windows-based PDF reader that also reads many ebook (*.epub, *.mobi), comic book formats (*.cbz, *.cbr), and many other similar formats, including some graphical image formats.

Graphics Editing and Viewing Software

• Krita - Krita is a powerful and feature-filled bitmap graphics editor; not quite Photoshop level—more like Paint Shop Pro on steroids; available for Windows, macOS, and Linux; plenty of active plug-in development; can open/save/export to many common graphics formats; becoming an Open Source go-to for Indie comic book creators who want to break from Clip Studio Paint, Procreate, and Photoshop (Open Source)

• GIMP - The GNU Image Manipulation Program is the big dog in the Open Source graphics editing space and is also an excellent Paint Shop Pro level editor with plenty of features; available for Windows, macOS, and Linux; can open/save/export to many common graphics formats (Open Source)

• IrfanView - Free-to-Use Windows-based graphical image viewer and basic editor; my go-to powerhouse for image viewing and light editing (resize, crop, rotate, color correct, etc) when I’m working with the Monster from Redmond; IrfanView has a separate plug-in installer that gives you the ability to view an incredible range of image formats, even to include DICOM medical images.

Portable Applications

Portable applications are typically Windows applications that are bundled with the libraries and support files which are necessary for them to run and packed into a single executable file. This means you can download the file onto your hard drive, run the program, then if you don’t want the application any longer, you just delete the file from your drive. No installation mess to clean up afterwards.

Want the potential to test a whole host of Open Source and Free-to-Use software packages in portable format?

Try installing PortableApps.

The PortableApps program manages its suite of over 1,400 portable applications that you can download for your machine and activate inside its shell. Many of the programs mentioned above can be found in the extensive PortableApps library.

Other Alternatives to Proprietary Applications

A great site for searching out any alternatives to programs you might wish to replace is AlternativeTo. Punch in the name of the software you are looking to replace and a list of crowd-sourced recommendations for that app will appear with links to the recommended applications’ websites.

Next Level: Replace Google, Apple, Amazon Cloud Services, Online Images, Email, and More

Sick of Big Corp spying on your stuff and using your data for their purposes? Louis Rossman is a firebrand Right-to-Repair activist and computer electronics repair shop owner who decided that people should have “humanese” instructions to build a file server, a home theater, a digital music system, an email management server, and a host of other computer services that typically are offered from Big Corp.

His FUTO site offers a detailed step-by-step method to build all of these computer services, using low-cost, higher-reliability computer components, based on Open Source software that is used by some of the largest corporations.

His detailed, human-friendly text instructions are found on his FUTO wiki at the following link. LINK.

Conclusion

Don’t get caught with your network down. There are Free and Open Source alternatives to keep your productivity humming. Investigate and install solutions that work for you sooner than later.

You never know when Cloudflare decides it needs another nap.

Come get some!

I’ve been off the Internet for a few months, so I’m getting back into posting with something related to Comics and Culture. For regular readers of this irregularly posted blog, I’m not planning on doing ongoing movie and TV commentary.

Introduction

Entertainment in the main today is facing challenging times. Intellectual properties (IP) that once gave the gifts of joy and flight of imagination to large segments of the population are now failing to draw audiences as they once did. These properties also may not speak to the children and grandchildren of those self-same fans. Why might that be the case?

A number of reasons are likely to blame for this decline in popularity of properties such as Star Wars, Star Trek, characters from both Marvel Comics and DC Comics, Dungeons & Dragons, and many popular classic video game titles.

Previous articles on this site (and those referenced in those articles) have touched on some of the ways that corporate ownership and management of these creative properties is generally to the detriment of the IP over time. The focus of the owners and their stewards is much more on making as much money as possible year-on-year and much less on preserving what made the properties popular with the customers of the works in the first place.

The General Pattern

The progression of Entertainments through the last five to six decades has been outlined very effectively by several commentators on the subject, to include deep dives into the Cultural Ground Zero of books, movies, and games by , , and . I strongly recommend investigating their Substack accounts as well as their websites for some fascinating analyses on this subject.

Watching Hollywood flame out at the box office in 2025 indicates that the identified pattern of comic book failure to sustain a long-term audience and their decline in popularity may be playing out once more in the arena of movies & television (or “streaming” as it is known to modern generations.)

What do I mean by “the pattern”? In general terms, Entertainments in the modern era (post-World War II) follow similar patterns to how comic books were taken up as a leisure activity within the Greatest, Silent, Boomer, Jones, and Gen X generations. The pattern also continues into how that audience is lost.

For an explanation of the generation terminology I use here, please see Brian Niemeier’s post on the “Lost Generations.” Link.

Creators of all types want to reach an audience. Corporate and Indie creators are alike in this respect. Word of mouth, various forms of advertisement in media, or some type of appearance or performance to display samples of the work are used.

In general terms: marketing.

Comic books in the United States began in the mid-1930s as saddle-stitched pamphlets reprinting comic strips from newspapers. The publishers gradually added characters of their own design into titles. Revenue from comic book advertisements were an important part of the publishers’ income, so eye-catching covers were essential in order to stand out among other periodicals and help prompt a purchase. Action-filled stories attracted young readers and some older Pulp readers to these early comic books which were covering the stands of news dealers, filling drug store spinners racks, and stuffed into soda shops’ periodical shelves around the United States.

The 10-cent magazines sold in the hundred of thousands to millions of copies per month from about 1936 to 1950. Publishers were earning substantial incomes from these “funny books” for several decades, though their popularity gradually declined from about 1950 onward. The Silent Generation was likely the most dedicated cohort of comic readers, composing the bulk of the EC Comics audience at that time. Comic book sales peaked between 1950 and 1952 for the 8 to 15 year old demographic leading the numbers in readership. Those numbers have never since been matched.

You can read more about these details in some of my previous articles here on my Substack. The following linked page provides a central jump point to several posts on the topic. Link.

From 1936 to about 1977, comics were produced by publishers and almost exclusively brought to retailers by some form of newsstand periodical distributor. These were the same companies who distributed news, sports, entertainment, and other periodicals to any retailer who wished to carry them.

In the late 1970s, the Direct Market was set up to supply specialty comic book retailers with products from the publishers. Both of these methods co-existed for the next couple decades before the Direct Market was chosen by mainstream publishers as the sole method of comic book distribution for the US market.

Why is this pertinent to movies, television, and various forms of games?

Because movie and television appear to be following the same pattern that comic books did in losing their audience over time. The wire diagram below will help explain the downfall of comics from the perspective of “failing to market to the widest audience”. This action or inaction is driven by the lack understanding regarding what people or things are served by the various functions of a business.

Note that general distribution of a product allows it to be seen by a much wider audience than a focused specialty distribution, as it is made available in many diverse outlets to many more people. The direct market style of distribution tends to provide producers with higher profit margins due to selling to people who are already familiar with and desire the product.

But, the key here is that the “fans” of the product had to become acquainted with the product somehow. How did this happen?

Those audience members who identify as “fans” are typically converted to being fans by first seeing the product as a member of the general audience, outside of the specialty channel.

Comic books distribution after 1978 looked something like that shown in the image above. Comics were provided either exclusively to a newsstand distributor to be delivered to an audience in the general retail market, or delivered exclusively via the direct market to local comic book retailers, or comic book retailers were supplied by both newsstand and direct market distributors.

This situation lasted from the late 1970s to near the end of the 20th Century for many comic book publishers and retailers. A notable exception was Marvel Comics which chose to forego use of newsstand distribution beginning in 1987. This corresponded with the year that Jim Shooter argued to maintain both newsstand and direct market distribution channels. Shooter was supposedly fired for this stance, as well as other reasons.

Read more details about these events at Jim Shooter’s website. Link.

Marvel Comics owners looked at the profits and profits margins of both distribution channels and chose to opt for using the one channel that made the most money — the direct market. But, what did the Marvel Comics owners neglect in they’re decision?

The newsstand distribution model was the origin point for most of the NEW COMIC BOOK READERS. The origin for future fans was outside of the local comic book retailers’ shops.

The owners essentially doomed their product — comic books — by choosing to allow their audience to age out — cutting off the primary channel to bring in new readers. The average age of a comic book reader from 1940 to 1950 was between 8 and 15 years of age. By 2024, that average had gone up to between 34 and 36 years old.

Now, let’s consider some Entertainments other than comic books. While the distinction between old and new distribution methods is cleaner to see with comic books, others show a similar pattern in their evolution as corporate cultural IP products.

Movies and Television/Streaming

Movies and television ruled the entertainment landscape for much of the 20th Century. The theater and movies were big business even in the Great Depression, through World War II, and during the Korean War. Television was barely a blip on the entertainment curve in 1950, but rose to be the direct competitor to movies by 1960.

In both movies and television, Hollywood had the stranglehold on big budget entertainment production and distribution, whether in the movie theater or over the airwaves via broadcast television. Additionally, these self-same media were the advertising and marketing channels for the studios to continually demo their new wares to willing audiences. Radio and television stations gathered ad revenue and movie theaters split box office receipts with studios.

Studios fought physical media at first, but eventually recognized that sales of movies and television shows were another lucrative channel for entertainment. Not everyone wanted to go to the theater. Some wanted to enjoy the movie on their small screen or projection television while relaxing on their own couch. Physical media came with the drawback of seeing the movie months after the theatrical release, with the trade-off that the owner could enjoy the film repeatedly.

Cable television became another channel to which Hollywood could send their creations. Broadcast restrictions that limited what could be shown on the three major networks did not apply to cable, so shows with more violence or sexual content could be transmitted there. Cable also allowed for movies to be licensed with less editing than was sometimes required for broadcast television. Not everyone had access to cable programming at first, but it generally widened the reach of Hollywood within existing media.

Between theatrical releases, physical media sales, and broadcast and cable licensing deals, Hollywood was doing pretty good.

All was well in the Entertainment Space for a time.

Things began to change around the beginning of the 21st Century.

For various reasons not discussed here, the Superhero movie gradually became the 800-lb gorilla in the realm of tent-pole productions from 2008 to 2019.

That changed again in 2020 with theaters being declared off-limits for months. Hollywood continued producing entertainment, though much more slowly through 2021 and 2022.

Focusing on the distribution channels, what changed in this period?

Streaming filled the many gaps created in the old distribution channels due to lock downs and closures.

Netflix was the already dominant player in streaming, but everyone wanted a big healthy slice of that pie. Multiple studios had already jumped into building out their own streaming services in the years prior to lock downs. According to Gary “Nerdrotic” Beuchler, Disney alone dropped $15 billion — with a “b” — into the development of their own streaming service.1

The goal was to continue to being profitable during the lock downs, even if the audience couldn’t come to theaters. New movies and television shows were ordered and fed into the streaming systems’ maws as rapidly as they could be produced while movie theaters were closed. The fatal flaw in the thought process behind this vision of the Streaming Money Printer was revealed with the first MCU film released after theaters began to reopen.

That movie was Black Widow.

Disney chose to release Black Widow simultaneously on their streaming service, Disney+, as well as in theaters. Theaters were angered and viewed this action as a betrayal, as was Scarlett Johansson who was contractually owed a percentage of the theatrical box office.

What was revealed was that:
(1) when offered a choice, the post-2020 audience generally preferred to stay home and watch their entertainment; and
(2) studios cared more about short-term profits over whether the system in which they operated remained healthy in the long-term.

Referencing both Nerdrotic and Chris Gore of Film Threat, this new reliance on streaming by studios was cutting short in-theater movie dwell times, which severely limited theater profits and their long-term viability.

That process was to

1. release a film exclusively for 90+ days into theaters, then

2. sell the exclusive broadcast rights for the film to broadcast network television and/or cable television for 30 to 60 days, then

3. release the film on physical media.

This was the “flywheel” of the Hollywood money printing machine — the one that no longer turns the machine as it once did.

Where comic books eliminated the distribution channel that produced new viewers, Hollywood made accessing their entertainment more complex over time with streaming and may be losing wider audience due to related complexity factors.

The Hollywood Entertainment consumer became familiar with the flywheel process after several decades of its use. It was predictable and relatively easy to understand.

With the old distribution channels for films, the audience knew:

• Movie released in theaters (1 to 3 month duration)

• Movie goes to broadcast and/or cable (1 to 2 month duration)

• Movie released on physical media (9 to 12 months post theater release)

• Advertisements/Reviews in same media as well as traditional entertainment outlets (newspapers, magazines, radio, Internet, etc)

Instead of adding to the consumers’ options and expanding choices, streaming services typically behave like silos of content which must be broken into to access the tasty entertainment. The consumer has to spend more time and effort in a search for specific content, then potentially subscribe to a service to watch it at an additional cost. Make it too difficult and the effort to find something specific might just turn into binge watching Barney Miller or Petticoat Junction because it is readily available.

After all, if it’s not immediately at your fingertips, does it matter all that much when you just want some mindless entertainment? Remember that general audiences tend to want easy entertainment, while fans will typically put up with more frustration.

Streaming isn’t Helping with Confusion or with Cost

The confusion between old and new distribution channels is compounded by a number of other factors.

• Studios purchasing other studios and their respective streaming services.

• Streaming services’ prices are not stable.

• Upcoming streaming products are causing wrangles over what studio content will find its way to cable providers and to YouTube, especially in Sports. (This is an exacerbation of the usual cable channel contract negotiations.)

• Falling attendance and rising ticket prices at theaters.

• Lack of profitability of big budget studio releases since 2017, which then fell off a cliff after 2019.2

• Potential shifts in audience preferences that Hollywood has ignored.3

Looming on the horizon is another specter: 2026 is the year when all three unions in the Entertainment industry will renegotiate their contracts with the studios, and the potential for a repeat of the 2023 strikes that damaged both the city and union members. Estimates of 42,000 jobs already lost due to the strikes is coupled with the fact that production within Los Angeles is already at levels below where they were during the 2023 strike.

Time will tell, but Hollywood may not have the time to discover a solution to its stacking problems.

Conclusion

Indications are that streaming did something similar to what Direct Market distribution did to comics. Instead of hiding the product behind specialty shop doors, Hollywood makes it more and more difficult for the wider potential audiences to watch their products. Maintaining multiple streaming services in order to follow a studio’s offerings is beyond the capability of most people today, both for economic reasons and for customer convenience.

This pattern entertainment destruction is common to almost all corporately-owned creative IPs. That pattern is neglect of the Future in favor of the Now due to focus on how much the IP can earn for the company over all other considerations. There are obviously other factors that ruin IP for successive generations. It is interesting that this factor is not only rather obvious, but also predictable.

There is no mandate that IP be preserved for either future profits or for future enjoyment by successive generations. But, preserving stockholder value would lend one to believe that C-suite denizens are performing rather poorly in maintaining the engine that creates annual dividends and holds up stock prices.

Sad, but it appears that the seed corn just gets eaten most every time in Modern Corporate America.

Changing the methods of delivery of entertainment and fracturing available content into “silos of excellence” can’t help but frustrate the casual consumer.

At least until they change the channel to find something else.

PulpFest has been on my radar to attend for the last three years. I was too far away prior to that for a smaller weekend con, but once I moved closer to Pennsylvania, it was definitely a draw.

I grew up reading Tarzan, Doc Savage, the Avenger, the Phantom, and other stories from the early 20th Century. I was lucky enough to enjoy the perks of the bookstore “Back Catalog”. Even held one in my hands and flipped through it a time or two, looking for various editions of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ John Carter of Mars books.

The Thor-Power decision of 1980 wiped away future opportunities to skim through that “new old stock” of books, to have the store proprietor order an out-of-print-but-yet-in-stock copy for you, and then see your book delivered in two to three weeks to be purchased and enjoyed. It was a rare thing.

The loss of these back catalog warehouses also made the local chain bookstore a less enticing place to look for new reads, and turned folks like me to the used book store, the garage sale, and ads in the back of magazines or comic books to find similar works to those I already had in my possession.

Little did I know at the time that most of these books were compendiums and compilations of works from another source — the Pulps — and were harvested from the ashes of a host of periodical publications, mainly by a creature who wanted them destroyed — the book publishing industry.

That was why venues like what I imagined PulpFest to be held a lot of appeal. I suspected that many of the folks who ran the event and the people who attended had similar experiences of hunting down writers of adventure whose works are oftentimes lost or at least hard to find due to the fragility of newsprint over time, the vagaries of world conflicts, and the forgetful nature of Man.

PulpFest has a storied history, and some of it can be found on their website.

The convention format is straight forward: Vendor halls are open for browsing and to make purchases from 9am to about 5pm.

From noon to 5pm and 7pm to 11pm or so, select talks and presentations cover topics of interest to Pulp aficionados, fans of Men’s Adventure stories, to connoisseurs and collectors of cover and interior spot artwork, to enjoyers of Pulp-influenced entertainment, and to those interested in the history of entertainment writing and publishing in the 20th Century. The 2025 Schedule of events that was featured this year can be found here. For posterity, and due to expected future website updates, an image of the schedule is also shown below:

The convention is currently held in Mars, Pennsylvania — how appropriate. This year’s con featured over 90 vendors with over 450 paid attendees. One might look at those numbers and scoff in comparison to larger conventions, such as DragonCon, GenCon, or various comic book conventions.

The apparent low attendance in comparison is easily compensated by the conversation that is engendered by such small venues as these. I spent most of an afternoon speaking with various vendors, authors, and artists who had come to celebrate the works of Pulp creators, as well as many genres to which the Pulps gave birth.

The 2025 dealers list is shown below.

I had a great time interacting with several of the people on this list, to include authors from Flinch! Books , Jim Beard and John Bruening (as well as discussing Jim’s own imprint, Becky Books), Richard C. White, the guys from Green Archer Comics, Veritas Entertainment, Brian K. Morris, and Charles F. Millhouse.

Artists Mark Wheatley and Douglas Klauba let me browse their paintings, inks, and prints, while graciously allowing me to pump them for information on their tools and methods for creating some exceptional illustrations and paintings.

Pulp-themed RPG creators were there as well, with Second Rodeo Games displaying their brand new tabletop adventure game, Fortune Seekers, which you can find here.

And, last but certainly not least, Henry Franke of the Burroughs Bibliophiles featured an outstanding display of Tarzan comic strip and comic book original artwork from Gray Morrow, Gil Kane, Russ Manning, and other artists.

The bonus highlight was meeting Castalia House “Sensor Sweep” writer/editor and Arkhaven Comics contributor . Thanks for some great convo, Sir!

Long to short, PulpFest is a worthy convention to consider if you like your Pulp served with excellent vendor opportunities, plenty of history on tap, and seasoned by good conversation with fascinating people.

Add to that being deep in debt for streaming shows on the yet-to-turn-a-profit Disney+ Channel that no one is watching outside of the 10 year-old and under crowd. These shows include Star Wars: Andor (22 hours of Roger Corman walking scenes that mummy-wrap 2 hours of somewhat interesting ideas vaguely connected to Star Wars) and the upcoming Ironheart (the Iron Man replacement that no one requested). Those two shows together mount production costs of at least $850 million, with no hope of turning a profit on either property as streaming now stands.

Fantastic Four, the Movie. Attempt #5.

It’s no wonder that the marketing machine is turning up the dial on the late July release of Fantastic Four: First Steps. Talk is rife of the movie’s retro-futuristic look and its 1960s period costuming, the classic FF threat of Galactus and the Silver Surfer, the lead-in to the upcoming Avengers movies (likely three rather than two), and the Kevin Feige promise to bring a successful FF production to the public after multiple attempts.

Four previous films of the FF were produced. First Steps will be the fifth attempt at an FF live action film. Disney and Marvel need this film to knock a home run out of the park, as it’s the only real movie by Marvel Studios1 that will hit before Avengers: Doomsday, which is now officially slated for December 2026 release (but more likely than not will release Summer 2027).

My favorite FF live action movie was the Roger Corman flick from 1994 that was never supposed be released. It was a rights-holder project to keep the property at the studio for a later attempt. It’s ok on story, lousy on special effects, but the actors deliver on the movie with a lot of heart. I don’t believe they were told this was going direct to the shelf. It’s the most comic book accurate of the films that exist, likely to include the newest one.

The 2005 and 2007 films were ok, and did a reasonable job with the material. Dr Doom was the weakest link in both films, if you ignore the laughable Giant-Cloud-as-Galactus in the second outing. The Silver Surfer in the second of the Fox films tops the current CGI-nightmare-creature-on-a-surfboard from First Steps by a couple of parsecs.

The 2015 abortion of a remake by Fox was another rights-holder film, but unlike the 1994 model, this one should never have been allowed to see the hallowed light of day.

Now Disney’s Marvel Studios takes a hack at the First Family of Marvel Superheroes, the first superhero comic of Marvel’s Silver Age.

What ever could go wrong?

What has been depreciated and minimized until now is whether that advertised “classic FF film” comes with the unwelcome features of Girl Boss2 that have been decried by the majority of current audience members in both Marvel movies and Disney+ TV shows featuring Marvel characters. Bob Iger, Disney CEO, has stated that Disney wants to address these divisive Sociopolitical elements that have been clearly inserted into what was sold to the public as Entertainment and put Marvel “back on track.”

With the release of FF tickets for presale, it appears that the Access Media is out in force to disprove that stance taken by Mr Iger.

The M-SHE-U is here in full-force with the Fantastic Four: First Steps movie.

Details can be found in this Collider article: 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps' Sneak Peek: A Sci-Fi Epic Inspired by Kubrick, Star Trek, and Even Raimi’s Spider-Man”

More can be found on Comic Book Movie: “THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS Producer Appears To Confirm That Sue Storm Will Be The Team's Leader“

Fandom Pulse’s also published a recent article on this developing fiasco at Disney that may spread to all female-led adventure films and TV series: “Marvel Accused Of Killing Female-Led Action Movie Genre With MSheU Films”

Feige is fighting Iger for dominance on the films and TV/streaming, especially for the upcoming X-Men movie. Feige wants a socially relevant film in the vein of the last 6+ years of money-losing Marvel “Girl Boss” Slop. Iger recognizes the need for a moneymaking blockbuster that doesn’t insult, denigrate, and drive away over half of the potential audience. It appears that Feige won that battle for Fantastic Four: First Steps.

FF will STILL feature a sex-swapped Silver Surfer hated by the comic book fans, and a Girl Boss Mary Sue Storm leading the Fantastic Four, rather than her husband, Reed Richards, who is the actual leader of the team. Feige & Co. confirmed they are leaning into the marginal-quality femcentric comic book run from Jonathan Hickman as their basis, rather than interpretations by Lee & Kirby or by John Byrne. The FF book eventually stumbled into cancellation a couple or so years after Hickman’s departure. Every subsequent reboot has fizzled.

It’s really no surprise though. A once-converged organization is a forever converged one until it is destroyed. Disney/Marvel Studios and Marvel Comics were long-ago converged and are on their inexorable downward slope into justly-earned oblivion.

Girl Boss is here to stay at Marvel Comics & Studios, until Death do they part.

But, this is all precursor to my central point.

My guess is what really turns off the editors, artists, producers, writers, and directors at Marvel and their parent company of Disney when it comes to the Fantastic Four is …

Mrs Reed Richards.

Not Sue Storm, the Invisible Girl, but Mrs Reed Richards, the Invisible Woman.

Background on the Fantastic Four: the Comic Book.

The Fantastic Four’s appeal from its inception was that it was not just a superhero team, but a FAMILY. Reed Richards, as the Von Neumann-level genius and adventurer. Ben Grimm, the gruff but loyal test pilot and best friend of Reed. Sue Storm, the love interest of Reed who supports him in his work. Johnny Storm, the hot-headed teenage brother of Sue and a budding master mechanic. Exposed to intense cosmic rays during a failed mission to be the first to land on the Moon, the quartet returned to Earth with fantastic powers and devoted themselves to combating strange menaces that threatened Mankind.

The book has been rightly compared to National Periodical’s (DC Comics) Challengers of the Unknown, which was drawn by Jack Kirby and Wally Wood prior to Kirby’s work on the Fantastic Four.

Though initially gifted with only the power of invisibility, Sue was a resourceful and daring character from the first. She was the very first to foil Doctor Doom in his initial plan to destroy the male members of the team in FF #5, and then rescue the boys from a vacuum chamber trap. No shrinking violet was she.

In Issue 22, thanks to tests on Sue’s powers by Reed due to his suspicions that she had not yet fully manifested her full range of powers, her abilities expanded. She could not only make herself invisible, but Sue was also able to make other items invisible, and could cast invisible force fields to shield herself and others from harm.

After marrying Reed Richards in FF Annual 3 (1965), Susan Storm changed her name to Susan Richards — Mrs Reed Richards. Over and over during both the Lee & Kirby run, as well as when John Byrne was shepherding the title, Susan demonstrated the power of her feminine personality, coupled with her cosmic ray-induced powers to become part of the glue that helped bond the team.

And one of the interesting features of the Lee & Kirby run was that the FF Family grew. Fantastic Four Annual 6 (1968) saw the birth of Franklin Richards. Johnny Storm also had a steady girlfriend, Crystal of the Inhumans, which complimented Ben Grimm’s long-time romance with Alicia Masters. It was clear that the FF was on the path to become a multi-generational comic book story under Lee & Kirby.

Alas, it was not to be. Cadence bought out Marvel in 1968, and Boomers took over the Marvel Bullpen in short order, under the direction of a corporation which wanted static IP for marketing their comic books, toys, cartoons, and films.

The Importance of Mrs Reed Richards in the Fantastic Four

Susan Storm, who married Reed Richards and thereby became Mrs Reed Richards, is a direct contradiction to the Girl Boss trope so favored by Disney and Marvel. Mrs Richards is a wife and mother, first and foremost. She stepped away from her duties as a team member periodically after Franklin’s birth, being replaced for a time by Crystal. She performs duties of a homemaker within the Baxter Building, as well as in the Richards’ home outside of New York City.

Susan has no “career” in the Lee & Kirby run, which is an obvious insult to the Disney SJWs. They cannot abide such an affront to their dogma of Feminism. All must be ground into the gray paste of sameness and occupy the Cubicle, working for the Corporation. The Homemaker is a heresy in their dark religion.

Thus, Mrs Reed Richards is like a crucifix presented to the face of the SJW vampire that has taken over Disney and Marvel. There was never any hope that the Self-centered Girl Boss would not replace Mrs Reed Richards with Mary Sue Storm in the Disney/Marvel Fantastic Four: First Steps film. It was guaranteed to be so as long as the desiccated zombie remains of Uncle Walt’s company shambles forward to its own Doomsday.

Those of us who appreciate the importance of the Selfless Feminine, expressed as Wife and Mother, will remember Mrs Reed Richards, nee Miss Susan Storm, long after the memory of this aberrant film is forgotten.

Old Pub continues its downward slide as the Death of the Lumber Mill rolls toward its inevitable conclusion. This recent post by highlights the woes of Penguin-Random House (PRH) after its acquisition by Simon & Schuster was prevented.

See Brian’s full story here.

The interesting twist in the PRH saga is how this is also the story of the downward slide of the American Mainstream Comic Book. Marvel Comics signed a deal with PRH to become their distributor of comic books and graphic novels back in March of 2021, making the final move away from both Diamond Distributors and Hachette Publishing in 2022.

A few links on that deal can be found here, here, and here.

Recall that DC Comics jumped from Diamond during early days of the COVID Year of 2020, moving from Diamond to a deal that had Lunar Distribution and UCS Comics Distributors fulfilling orders (sort of) to local comic shops (LCS). DC eventually settled on Lunar as their sole exclusive distributor.

Background on that deal here, here, and here.

Diamond Distribution hasn’t settled its churn either, with Alliance Entertainment withdrawing its bid to purchase the Chapter 11-facing company. Will it recover to return as a distribution option? We shall see.

Links here and here.

What this points to is the ongoing fragility in the OldPub printing and bulk distribution models, as well as in their markets. The threat is primarily to their physical sales endpoints — local bookstores and the LCS.

While PRH struggles with layoffs and drawdowns brought on by ignoring and often deriding half their market (men), the LCS is being hammered from multiple sides by past changes in distribution, potential price increases due to publishers’ use of overseas markets for sourcing their paper and printing, and by disruptions in product logistics.

See this 2019 article about the Big Five use of China’s paper and printing industries to get a feel for what has likely happened in the intervening six years. Tough times likely ahead for the Lumber Mills.

Logistics was a choke point due to COVID in 2020 for physical distribution of many products. Comic books and comic-related items were no exceptions. Many an LCS took immediate body blows that either destroyed their businesses within a year or two, or delivered enough damage that their ability to stay in business between 2020 and 2025 required restructuring, shifting to other items on offer (manga, anime, collectible movie memorabilia, books), or quietly giving up after a prolonged struggle to stay afloat.

The problem of current year American comics rotting on LCS shelves like Disney Star Wars merch collecting dust in defunct Toys ‘R Us stores doesn’t help that situation at all.

Should PRH’s troubles accelerate, it could create another wave of similar problems for the LCS model. Stores that depend on Marvel Comics could again be faced with unexpected churn. LCSs that are already strained may break.

Opportunities for Independent creators of books, graphic novels, and other entertainments again abound for those who are interested in jumping into the pool.

Remember the tiny Mammals who survived the asteroid that killed the Dinosaurs.

A number of articles on Substack and elsewhere have combined with discussions with friends on various forums in regard to the future of much of entertainment, as well as how we interact as human beings. This article won’t be all that coherent, but rather offers some ideas thrown up against the Internet wall for you to consider.

Three specific articles here on the ‘Stack are background for much of this post.

1. The loss of what are termed “Third Spaces”. Not home, not work. The place we can go to do non-home and non-work things with real people. discusses this here:

   Kairos on Substack

   After the Mall: Can We Build a New Third Place?

   It's hard for Zoomers to believe, but the mall was once not only the preferred place to shop, its importance went beyond a mere retail hub. The mall served as a gathering spot where people connected, interacted, and shared their lives beyond their homes and workplaces…

   Read more

   2 years ago · 17 likes · 8 comments · Brian Niemeier

2. The vanishing middle man of boardgaming, and other amusements, was discussed by in this article on Boardlandia’s closure.

   Fandom Pulse

   Online Retailer Boardlandia Closing And Blames Trump Tariffs Despite Admitting Years Of "Increasing Challenges"

   Board gaming is getting a shakeup more than perhaps any other because of tariffs, and now the online retailer Bordlandia is shutting down and blaming tariffs for their situation…

   Read more

   a year ago · 8 likes · 4 comments · Fandom Pulse

3. The bifurcation of tabletop roleplaying games (TTRPG) into the Clubhouse, where friends meet to game, and the gachapon ideal of Hasbro/WotC’s future vision of Dungeons & Dragons. presents his view of good games for the Clubhouse in this article, but take some time and read more on his analysis, as it’s been predictive as to the evolution of TTRPGs in the last decade or so.

   Walker's Lakeside Clubhouse

   Games For The Clubhouse (Revised)

   As the image implies, most of what is sold as a Fantastic Adventure Game is just slop…

   Read more

   a year ago · 7 likes · Bradford C. Walker

My discussion also hinges on posts from several gamers, modelers, and researchers in games. These people have a good background in the world of gaming and express a genuine love of gaming as an intellectual as well as an entertainment pastime. Please visit the Substacks of , , , and .

Hasbro/WotC dominates the commercial TTRPG industry. They are shifting to a digital model that will likely leave the Friendly Local Gaming Store (FLGS) in the same boat as the Local Comic Shop (LCS). Disruptions in distribution from 2020 through 2024 and a shift to digital platforms for distribution have sent many LCSs across the nation into oblivion. Those that are hanging on do so in many cases by shifting focus to Manga, collectible books, movie memorabilia, and other items to make up the loss of sales from American comics. As Hasbro/WotC move to a digital platform, it is highly likely that the FLGSs will see the same economic pressures.

Both suffer from the ability of the consumer to go directly to a manufacturer or supplier, such as Amazon, and order many of the items that the LCS or FLGS sells. This cuts further into their profitability and survivability as a business. Both compete on the commodity front for the money and attention of the consumer. It is unlikely that the FLGSs and LCSs can win on that battlefield. It’s true that there is a lot of OSR — Old School Renaissance — game product out there, but getting it known to players is often a tall hill to climb.

Where might the FLGS/LCS have an advantage?

On the personal interaction front, in “meat space”, with real life interactions.

I’m a pretty solid believer in Bradford’s analysis on bifurcation. For those who want D&D on their mobile devices and have interactions with others in this manner, Hasbro/WotC has them covered. For those who want to meet with and interact with people while gaming, can the FGLSs and LCSs fill some of that demand?

Consider my FLGS: composed of three separate locations — comic shop, game store, old 5&10 store (“five & dime” — look it up for some fun). The comic store gave up on tracking new Marvel and DC back in 2022. They still sell older comics, but they stock Manga, SF classic books, movie posters from the pre-1990 eras, other memorabilia, and a host of related items. The game store has five basement rooms that host games, with a couple small rooms on the main floor. A small portion of the main shop still sells games, but they are shifting to hosting games more and more.

What if they also decided to offer sales of snacks and drinks, popcorn, maybe installed a small pizza kitchen, or just allowed food to be delivered? Memberships get a discount on all services offered, but all are welcome.

Would that — could that — space become a “third space” to rekindle greater in-person interaction? I think that if you could work out an affordable membership option, you might be able to do that.

Or, at least you might stand a better shot than depending on Hasbro/WotC to keep you supplied with gaming products.

If any of this makes sense to you, and you have a FLGS or LCS on the edge in your area, then maybe have a talk with them about some of these ideas. Probably won’t work for some — perhaps even many. But maybe a few can swing this.

Maybe we can find a spot for a few new Third Spaces in the tumult of the Mainstream Entertainment Industry burning itself to ash.

“Roll for initiative.”

Based Book Sale

2025 Spring Based Book Sale

Bypass the cultural gatekeeping, support non-woke authors, and get yourself some great based books from both established and emerging talent for only $0.99 – many titles free – but only for one week! The sale starts today, and it runs through the end of the day, Tuesday February 18…

Read more

a year ago · 53 likes · 23 comments · Hans G. Schantz

Hans Schantz, the Amazing Aetherczar of fame, has once again demonstrated that “sleep is for the weak” by wrangling dozens of authors and well over 200 books, priced at 99 cents or less — read “free” — for the Spring installment of the Based Book Sale. This, while he is writing at least one substantial science book and serializing it, publishing his Substack sites, working full time, consulting on science research, tutoring, and spending time with his equally active family.

I’m getting tired just thinking about this K-shell electron buzzing about a heavy nucleus getting all this stuff done! Whew!

Regardless of his coffee-fueled obligations, his hard work and dedication to Independent Publishing and Based Writers of Quality has once again produced a phenomenal sampling of entertainment that should appeal to and be enjoyed by a wide range of readers. You are bound to find some great authors in the selection that Hans has assembled for you. And, in purchasing and reading these books, please remember this critical thing:

LEAVE A REVIEW ON AMAZON!

Giving even a short review is a huge help to independent authors. Your feedback helps them in the algorithm, and it might help guide future works by those folks. Take that 5 or 10 minutes to give that author a review, especially if their stories entertained you.

Other than making people who run across my site aware of the Based Book Sale, I am here to personally recommend a few authors on the list and their works. These recommendations are for authors on the Based Book list whose works I have read. Some of them are people who I have worked for by creating illustrations used in their ad work or concept art for their stories. Some are also contributors on Substack. All of these authors are people whose work I have enjoyed, and I continue to follow them and support their writing.

Here we go!

(Attention Span Labs & Splendor of Fire) and (Heroic Adventure Fiction) are a husband and wife team of authors, with Shell also slinging ink as their in-house illustrator. Their “Ascension Epoch Universe” is a marvelous amalgam of classic science fiction, mythology, fantasy, slice-of-life, and alternate history. The genre of their stories is pure Pulp in my view, in that SF, Weird Western, Young Adult fiction, Film Noir, Chthonic Horror, Romance, and raw Adventure are combined into a most entertaining and satisfying brew. And, in my estimation, they spin up the Martian War milieu better than H.G. Wells did! They have several books in the sale. These are:

House of Refuge: A Seasteading Adventure Story by Michael DiBaggio

Population of Loss: Four Tales of the Martian War (Martian War Chronicles Book 1) by Michael DiBaggio & Shell Presto

Salamander Six by Michael DiBaggio

After Dark: Teen Superhero Adventures on the Eerie Side of Pittsburgh (East End Irregulars Book 1) by Michael DiBaggio

The Dismal Tide (East End Irregulars Book 2) by Michael DiBaggio

Copper Knights and Granite Men (Challenger Confidential Book 1) by Michael DiBaggio & Shell Presto

Michael Kingswood is a prolific teller of tales who spins an engrossing story. I’ve read a good deal of his short fiction and back two of his fundraisers. You definitely want to check out what he has on offer here.

Tales of Adventure #1: A Compilation Of Five Short Novels by Michael Kingswood

52 Stories In 2023: Volume One by Michael Kingswood

is both author and editor. His award-winning Soul Cycle series hooked me to his writing. He followed that up with two series in his XSEED universe filled with giant stompy robots in a galaxy-spanning battle to save Humanity. Brian’s first book in his newest series — The Arkwright Cycle — is offered in this Based Book Sale. Go get it!

The Burned Book: Arkwright Cycle Book I by Brian Niemeier

John C. Wright has been said to be the finest living Science Fiction author, and I will not contest this claim, as I have over a dozen of his books in my shelves that testify to that fact. He is a weaver of enchanting and awe-inspiring tales who can place you on a roller coaster of wild and winsome adventure. Three of his works are listed here, and I strongly recommend “Somewhither” for your consideration.

One Bright Star to Guide Them by John C. Wright

Somewhither: The Unwithering Realm — Omnibus Version by John C. Wright

The Last Straw: A Critical Autopsy of a Galaxy Far, Far Away by John C. Wright

is a talented author who is just as home in non-fiction as fiction, as his book on fans of the band Rush demonstrates. His complete Science Fiction series The Swordbringer Saga is available in this sale. Alex draws you in and keeps you enthralled in the journey and struggles of exiled Earthers creating a new home for themselves among the stars.

The Last Ancestor: The Swordbringer Book 1 by Alexander Hellene

The Second Sojourn: The Swordbringer Book 2 by Alexander Hellene

The Final Home: The Swordbringer Book 3 by Alexander Hellene

Kit Sun Cheah is a prolific writer of Science Fiction, Cyber-future drama, dramatic takes on historical fiction, and is also a keen observer of the work of writing and making ones way as a modern independent author. His twist on the genre of LitRPG and a collection of essays on Pulp writing in the 21st Century are on offer during this sale.

Dungeon Samurai Volume 1: Kamikaze (An Anti-LitRPG Dungeon Crawl) by Kit Sun Cheah

Pulp on Pulp: Tips and Tricks for Writing Pulp Fiction by Kit Sun Cheah (editor), Misha Burnett (editor), et al.

and are two creators who I met here on Substack, and I’ve greatly enjoyed interacting with them and reading their writing. Both are also involved in comic book creation, so they have my interest and my attention. Check out their books on offer in the sale, then swing by their Substack pages to read more of their work.

Escaping Fate (Paradox Book 1) by Henry Brown

Rebooting Fate (Paradox Book 2) by Henry Brown

Defying Fate (Paradox Book 3) by Henry Brown

In a Mirror, Darkly by K.M. Carroll

Russel May’s first book in his Eta Cancri Series is free in the sale, and I have been anticipating his second, Solarvoid, for some time. Engaging Science Fiction with strong religious undertones may sound contradictory for some, but May has crafted a fine tale that is a very satisfying read.

Eta Cancri by Russell May *FREE*

Solarvoid (Battle for Eta Canrci Book 2) by Russell May

Leigh Brackett, Edgar Rice Burroughs, G.K. Chesterton, and E. E. “Doc” Smith have inexpensive 99-cent or FREE collections in the sale. These classic authors helped define the Pulp Era and what came after it.

Much like reading H. Beam Piper, if you don’t have these collections or have not read stories by these authors, you are wrong.

Stop being wrong.

Now.

Black Amazon of Mars by Leigh Brackett *FREE*

33+ Classic Collection of Edgar Rice Burroughs. Novels. Stories. Illustrated: Tarzan of the Apes, A Princess of Mars, The Mucker, The Land that Time Forgot, The Lost Continent and others by Edgar Rice Burroughs

The Complete Father Brown Mysteries by G. K. Chesterton

The E. E. “Doc” Smith MEGAPACK: 11 Classic Novels and Stories by E.E. “Doc” Smith

Of course, we can’t forget the man who complied these lists of independent entertainment — Hans Schantz. The first book of his Hidden Truth series is on sale here. The story of a young man who unwittingly unearths a secret that has been masked by a worldwide conspiracy of powerful individuals and organizations. It’s a secret they are willing to kill to keep. Science fact, science fiction, adventure, and more make this a well-crafted and entertaining tale. Strong recommend!

The Hidden Truth by Hans G. Schantz

That’s it.

I’m done here.

Get in there!

Based Book Sale

2025 Spring Based Book Sale

Bypass the cultural gatekeeping, support non-woke authors, and get yourself some great based books from both established and emerging talent for only $0.99 – many titles free – but only for one week! The sale starts today, and it runs through the end of the day, Tuesday February 18…

Read more

a year ago · 53 likes · 23 comments · Hans G. Schantz

Intro

Thanks to Fandom Pulse, I found out that the last of the Direct Market Comic Book Distributors — Diamond Comic Distributors, Inc. — has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. This is a great article at Fandom Pulse, summarizing the events and recent background, and its linked below. Please take some time to read it, then pop back over here if you want a bit more background on the Direct Market collapse.

Fandom Pulse

Diamond Comic Distributors Declares Chapter 11 Bankruptcy In Another Blow To Mainstream Comic Books

Diamond Comic Distributors has been on the decline for years as the former monolith in comic book store distribution, but now a message from their CEO revealed the company is filing chapter 11 bankruptcy…

Read more

a year ago · 2 likes · 2 comments · Fandom Pulse

What does this mean for companies who still depend on Diamond to distribute their wares? Well, it’s find another channel, as did Marvel and DC, or shut the doors, or — maybe do something else to get their product to their readers.

Distribution of Periodicals: The Newsstand

I’ve talked about newsstand distribution in some of my previous posts. It was the way you distributed and sold any type of periodical, if you weren’t offering a subscription via the US Post Office. Pulp magazines, newspapers, glossy magazines, comic books, and all manner of periodically published printed materials could be sent by mail, if certain restrictions were followed.

For over four decades, newsstand distribution was the way comics found their way to the drug stores, candy and soda shops, grocery stores, book stores, restaurants, and darned near any other venue that wanted to engage with a periodical distributor. If the shop had a magazine rack, then they likely worked with a distributor.

Problem with the model was when it came to inventory. The producer of the periodical would get the returns of unsold merchandise, and they were only paid for what the retailer sold, not everything that they provided.

If the retailer didn’t sell all 10 issues of the magazine he ordered, the remainder could be returned to the distributor for a future credit on upcoming purchases. This wasn’t a huge issue until the Thor Power decision of 1979/1980. That eliminated a tax break that publishers received on their inventories of back catalog materials.

Even before this event, publishers wanted another channel to get books to customers. Additionally, the collectors market was growing due to fan interest and fan publications such as Jerry Bails “The Who's Who of American Comic Books”. In 1978, the Direct Market was created to address some of these issues.

Direct Market: Take All You Want Comes to an End

As discussed in a previous post, the Direct Market addressed some of the issues that publishers had with the Newsstand Distribution Model, specifically, the returned inventory. Under the Direct Market, the retailer ordered a specific number of copies of a comic book issue, as under the Newsstand Model, but now if the retailer ordered 10 and only sold 7, the retailer kept the remaining 3 issues. No returns.

Direct Market vs Newsstand: What’s the Difference?

The structure of the Direct Market made it very difficult for small retailers to order comics for their shops because they rarely had the storage space for unsold issues. The comic book was also a loss leader for most businesses, as it was likely more a secondary sale to children who accompanied their parents for other business in the store. The Newsstand distributor who brought new books and took old ones back was likely the favored option for these folks. Why do I say that? Because when comics vanished from the Newsstand distributors, they also vanished from the landscape of the small retailer who was not a dedicated Local Comicbook Shop (LCS).

For the LCS, the Direct Market was a solid model. Regular customers would get orders in for their books to the owner, and the owner would build a list of books to send to his Direct Market distributors.

Yes, that is distributors with an “s”.

Take a look at a snapshot of the International Association for Direct Distribution Inc., circa 1991. Eleven distributors of comic books and comic book-adjacent materials.

What a wonder! Choices.

With the option to have the Direct Market, Newsstand Distribution, and Postal Subscriptions, it would appear that the publishers, retailers, and comic book readers should pretty much have it all, right?

Jim Shooter Takes a Stand and Pays for It

Jim Shooter was working at Marvel Comics as its Editor-in-Chief from 1978 to 1987 when he was fired. His termination was partly because he recognized that Newsstand Distribution was an important component of the Comic Book business along with Direct Market distribution methods, while others in the company believed Direct Market was the only profitable route for the company to take.

Let’s tune in to Mr Shooter’s reasoning, excerpted from his excellent though long-abandoned blog:

Interestingly, the Direct Market did not seem to be cannibalizing the newsstand market.

Don’t get me wrong, the newsstand market was limping along around breakeven. I wrote about that HERE. But, it had been going like that before the advent of the Direct Market. And, it was nonetheless accounting for the great majority of comics sold.

What seemed to be happening was this: The Newsstand market, with its many tens of thousands of outlets (around 75,000, I think) served by the 400+ ID Wholesalers in North America was continually bringing in new readers. Some of them became enthusiasts and found their way to the comics shops. But new newsstand buyers kept turning up to replace them.

Titles like G.I. JOE, Transformers and Star Wars helped attract new readers at the newsstands. Most people, especially kids, didn’t know or care who Iron Man was, but every kid knew G.I. JOE. Sooner or later, a kid with a Snake Eyes figure in his pocket was bound to pass a spinner rack somewhere.

The newsstand cast a wide net. It funneled wannabe collectors into the comics shops. In a way, the spotty, unreliable, inconsistent nature of newsstand distribution was a good thing, because someone who just had to have every issue was more or less forced to seek out a comics shop.

Link for quote is here — Comic Book Distribution - 03.

Shooter recognized that despite the lackluster profits of the Newsstand Distribution model, it did several things for Marvel Comics and comics in general:

1. Wide-net Marketing.

2. Introduction of new readers to the world of comics.

3. Cross-platform marketing, e.g. toys + comics, movies + comics, etc.

4. Feeder for Local Comic Shops.

Long to short, Shooter lost the battle to keep Newsstand Distribution at Marvel, and shortly thereafter he was terminated from the company in 1987. Read more about Comic Book Distribution at the link above and at these two follow-on links. Shooter’s awareness of both marketing and distribution of comics came from work at both National Periodicals (DC) and Marvel Comics between 1966 and 1987.

Comic Book Distribution - 01

Comic Book Distribution - 02

But, let’s not leave until we cap off the discussion with the loss of subscriptions. Marvel clearly threw all its eggs into the Direct Market basket early in the game. DC would follow this path as well, but they hung onto their subscription channel until 1999. The sad fact is one of the reasons that they abandoned it was the LCS demand for it to cease, in order to pull in those revenues to make up for deteriorating sales at retail. The effect on publisher and LCS profits was likely negligible, but it again cut off the comic readers who didn’t have ready access to an LCS.

For comic books, the late 80s and the 90s were an era of eating your seed corn with a shovel.

The Heroes World Debacle

Run forward to 1994 at Marvel Comics. DC’s 1992 “Death of Superman” series, while initially profitable, had killed the readers’ trust in “stories actually matter in continuity” for both Marvel and DC. Sales began to falter in 1993 and 1994. Ron Perelman, then the CEO and owner of Marvel Comics, took steps to buy Heroes World, the third largest comic book distributor, to be the exclusive distributor for Marvel Comics.

This led both Diamond and Capital City, the #1 and #2 distributors, to attempt to become the exclusive distributor for every other comic book company. The sale to Marvel went through, Heroes World became the exclusive distributor of Marvel Comics, and failed miserably. So miserably that by 1997, Heroes World was dead and gone and Marvel Comics had filed for — wait for it — bankruptcy protection.

Not only was Heroes World gone, but because Marvel Comics made up between 30-40% of all comic book distributors’ inventories, all the other comic book distributors went out of business as well.

Except for Diamond.

Check out a short series of web articles by Chuck Rozanski on this comic book burn-down by DC (Death of Superman) and Marvel (Heroes World) due to ignorance, arrogance, malfeasance, and outright greed.

Start at this link.

Diamond Distribution: Lord and Master of All They Survey

As with most monopolies, many retailers and readers didn’t like the landscape presented by the new boss, Diamond. Their PREVIEWS catalog only had so much space, so Marvel, DC, Dark Horse, and some larger Independents received the right of first booking, leaving smaller Indies struggling to get their books into the LCS channels, sort of like driving around and begging an LCS to carry their books.

As LCS sales of comics continued to lag from the late 80s through the 90s, more shops carried figurines, posters, toys, and other higher margin materials in their stores, again turning the comic book into a kind of “loss leader” within the comic shop. The collectors market was hot-and-cold, but ancillary sales of comic book related materials became a mainline sales item.

So, Diamond expanded their distribution into these areas as well, reducing the solicitation space for Independents even further.

Digital Domination: Whither the Comic Book?

It hard to say what will come next for a number of comic book companies if they don’t find another distribution channel, and relatively soon. The Penguin-Random House channel might be big enough to accommodate all these folks listed below.

But, what about these guys? Where do they go to distribute their comic book-related games, collectible card sets, character figurines, posters, toys, slipcases, comic book bags and boxes, and a host of other supplies? Who is going to ship and move all this stuff to the consumers?

“2500 new titles and products”

“hundreds of leading publishers and manufacturers”

This is gonna sting unless your company has been planning for it and is out ahead of this issue.

And let’s not forget the Local Comicbook Shops. Already on hard times over the COVID slap, this will likely winnow away another huge swath, leading to even fewer comic book readers on the horizon. The knock-on effects are going to be interesting, to say the least.

What’s next?

Really good question, and here I am without a pat answer. Solutions will be found by the people who really want to make comic books in these times.

Digital distribution is a thing. Fundraising sites and Neo-patronage sites exist and are successful for some creators. Setting up a store via Amazon, eBay, Lulu, and other venues is possible. You can even set up a personal store on your own home-built website.

Looks like another great opportunity for the Independent with a will to win to see if he can create the next great event for an entertainment medium.

Will comic books survive?

Dunno. But, I’ll be sticking around to find out, one way or another.

Thanks for reading!

Other than celebration of the Savior, keep in mind that the new year has already commanded a great deal of our time in freak-out news and panic attempts by the Media.

Regular readers have an idea of my distaste for Alan Moore, but he was being predictive with a Watchman character who designed psyops for a living, of course, to “save Humanity”.

Yeah, it’s Adrian Veidt. Ozymandias.

The World of Screens. Not the real world. Not reality. The fabricated world of the Screen. The world of information, of entertainment, of revelations — built by the Veidts of the world.

Marshall McLuhan wept.

This 2025, take a look at what you are doing with your screens. Really look at how much time you spend on them, and the focus and energy you give to them. Set up a timer the next time you tell yourself “hey, I’m just gonna read e-mail and look at a few news stories.” Bet you won’t undershoot your estimated “time to completion.”

The screens that show you something that affects you and your family and community? Yeah, pay attention and take appropriate action.

The screens that scream at you because you are not doing something, or doing too much of another thing, or ignoring a world-shaking problem, or not paying attention to something you can’t reasonably affect?

Note the issues, and if not something that affects you and yours, then put it aside until you can make a difference.

Turn it off.

Go do something for your family. Fix that broken door latch, play with your children, do some laundry, or read that book you have put off for so long because you don’t have time. Write that impactful short story or novel that you’ve been meaning to write to tell about why traditional culture is worth saving. Talk to someone who might be interested in why old books are so critically important to read and study. Help someone younger who has lost some of that hope and faith they will need to get them through the challenges of life.

Because, the Adrian Veidts of the world want you locked to your screens and worried all the time. Worried about things you can’t change or even begin to affect. They want you tied to those screens and doing little or nothing, other than despairing.

You want to beat the Veidts of the world?

Focus on making their screens irrelevant.

Blessed Epiphany to all of you!

Rick also has a killer website for gaming philosophies, tips & tricks, and some fun stories of his decades in gaming, Don’t Split the Party. His DStP Discord is also a fun ride for asking Table-top Role Playing Game (TTRPG) questions. You can find an open invite to it on his website.

Rick is a tremendous fan of TTRPG of many types and flavors, but creating his own version of AD&D 1E with some home-brew improvements has been his “heartbreaker” for some time. That heartbreaker bears the name …

Lance & Tome.

The project is beginning to bear fruit with Rick’s release of his “Mass Combat” Appendix as a free standing game element. This is now available in PDF format at this DriveThruRPG link.

If you prefer your RPG rules in a physical format, Rick also has you covered with a paperback version via Lulu that you can find at this link.

For his larger Lance & Tome project, I am pleased to be providing artwork for the effort. Click the images below for some larger samples of interior illustrations.

As Rick’s project releases, I will update here on my Substack.

If you are a Superhero fan and play Champions, Rick also has his own universe of Heroes, Villains, and Psychotronic Situations! It’s called . . .

ATLANTAVERSE!

Like Lance & Tome products, you can find this bad boy on Rick’s Harbinger Games store on DriveThruRPG — Link is HERE! Check out the rest of Rick’s products at his store on DTRPG while you are there — link here.

There are also rumors of Atlantaverse being converted to the Ascendant system. Again, updates will be here as they arrive.

Enjoy some art from Atlantaverse current and future products.

That’s it for now!

Build that Clubhouse!

Get to gaming!

Earlier this week, I read this article from regarding Saturday Morning Cartoons and Action for Children’s Television (ACT) in the Great Year of 1968. You can now read about it on his Substack at the link below.

Kairos on Substack

How ACT Helped Kill Adolescent Entertainment

What are kids watching these days? Gen Y's nostalgic myopia for Saturday morning cartoons and PG-13 horror flicks can leave them blinkered when it comes to how their now-adolescent children are entertaining themselves…

Read more

2 years ago · 2 likes · Brian Niemeier

Knowing a bit about comics, cartoons, and the Cultural Fracture Point of 1968, which preceded 1997’s Cultural Ground Zero, I dropped a link in a comment regarding why ACT and other organizations pushed to change the genre of cartoons on network television. I’ll drop that same link here for you a bit later in this article.

But, reading Brian’s article again, something clicked for me as to the events described in the article. Something familiar.

First, some background on 1968.

The Federal Government of 1968 was not the FedGov of 1954 as discussed in my previous articles on the Comics Code. The Eisenhower administration, especially in its second term had seen the Federal Government establish the Interstate Highway system, intervene in the Little Rock, Arkansas desegregation crisis, agree to the partition of Vietnam into North and South, and engage in many Cold War stand-offs with both the Soviet Union and China.

While Eisenhower’s focus was predominantly international, Kennedy’s New Frontier initiative was an example of renewed Progressivism on the domestic front. After Kennedy’s assassination — which was a significant blow to much of the American public, President Johnson continued in the vein of expansion of social programs and the attempted elimination of poverty with his Great Society program, ultimately spending upwards of $3 trillion in the failed effort.

In general, the Federal Government became much more willing to get involved in cultural, social, and economic issues between 1952 and 1968.

Social unrest was accompanying the Boomers’ entry into adulthood, along with the growth of the drug culture, and the escalation of the Vietnam War throughout the LBJ administration. Draft protests, draft card burning, and student riots and campus take-overs (often “sit-ins” to shut down administration activities and classes) were common in the mid- to late-60s.

These violent protests finally ended with the shootings at Kent State in Ohio on May 4, 1970 when National Guard troops fired on students and killed four. International relations throughout this period were marked by tensions between the US and the Soviet Union.

Stressful times.

But what was so special about 1968? Many historians identify that year as a cultural break point between the Greatest Generation and the Silents having the lead hand in driving cultural and social issues and the advent of the Boomers taking the lead in shaping culture. They weren’t alone in this though.

While the Greats and Silents were sending men into space, the wilder half of the Boomers were flooding the zone with their preferred cultural norms as “hippies”, “yippies”, and a few “zippies”. Some Boomers were off fighting the Vietnam War. Others with college deferments that allowed many of them to avoid the draft were studying for their Bachelor’s degrees and getting ready to graduate into the world of work in 1968.

Some thoughts on 1968, the year:

• A structured timeline of events in 1968.

• Important events of 1968, in no particular order.

• It was a major turning point, culturally and socially, for the better.

• It was a toilet of a year.

Now that we have set the stage, what was the big deal about Saturday Morning Cartoons in the 1960s?

Several studios were doing animation for the small screen in the late 1950s and the 1960s. These included:

• Paramount Cartoon Studios (formerly Fleischer Studios)

• Hanna-Barbera Productions

• DePatie-Freleng Enterprises

• Filmation

• United Productions of America

• Warner Bros. Cartoons, and

• MGM Cartoons

The big dogs on the block for Saturday cartoon shows were William Hanna and Joseph Barbera from Hanna-Barbera Studios. The pair struck out on their own business after being released from the MGM movie studio where they worked making Tom & Jerry cartoon shorts.

The MGM shorts were made using full-animation techniques, producing highly fluid motions in the characters. The issue with this technique is that it takes a long time to produce even a short 10-minute cartoon. After leaving MGM in 1957, they began making their own animated characters using limited-animation techniques, as well as Xerography processes for copying, which was significantly faster than full animation.

The Ruff and Reddy Show was Hanna and Barbera's first TV venture. It premiered on NBC on December 14, 1957. The Huckleberry Hound Show followed close on Ruff and Reddy’s heels in 1958, winning an Emmy -- the first cartoon show to ever do so. After incorporating into Hanna-Barbera Productions, Inc., the pair followed up with The Quick Draw McGraw Show and Loopy De Loop. All this led up to the biggest Prime Time (evening) cartoon of the 1960s:

• The Flintstones.

Yeah, before The Simpsons did it, Fred and Wilma were there for seven seasons. Note that both Top Cat and Jonny Quest were also Prime Time offerings from Hanna-Barbera when first broadcast. Check out this listing of Hanna-Barbera productions spanning several decades.

• Click this link if you’d like to enjoy some Flintstones theme music.

Hanna-Barbera had some of the best cartoon themes and incidental music around, thanks to the musical stylings of Hoyt Curtin. These jazz-infused themes tended to set the HB crew’s offerings apart from other studios. Take a listen to some of the themes from Jonny Quest, Space Ghost, and Birdman. Curtin also composed the theme for the American release of the Japanese cartoon Science Ninja Team Gatchaman, called Battle of the Planets in the States. Here’s a short video on Hoyt Curtin and his work.

Along with great music, the voice cast was top notch, featuring some recognizable personalities from the late 40s and 50s radio, TV, and movies, to include Paul Frees, Gerald Mohr, Daws Butler, Don Messick, and Mel Blanc. Newer voice talent included Gary Owens, William Marshall, and Tim Matheson.

Tim Matheson was the voice of Jonny Quest, Young Samson, Sinbad Junior, and Space Ghost’s Jace, as well as other characters in Hanna-Barbera animated features.

Gary Owens is familiar to some as the off-beat announcer of Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In. Owens provided the stentorian voice of Space Ghost.

And the booming, all-encompassing voice of Birdman was provided by opera-trained actor William Marshall, who some might remember in the role of Dr Richard Daystrom from Star Trek (the original series), or from the title role of the first Blacksplotation film, Blackula, or perhaps as the King of Cartoons from Pee Wee’s Playhouse, or the Captain of the Video Pirates from Kentucky Fried Movie. Marshall could give James Earl Jones’ voice a run for its money.

Here’s a video snapshot of what was on the schedule in the 1967 to 1968 season. Check out the video here.

To the video author: Sorry, dude, but Rocky and Bullwinkle creator Jay Ward’s George of the Jungle rocked.

That line-up should get any 7 to 12 year old boy interested in watching! And no small number of girls as well!

So what was all the fuss about with Saturday Morning Cartoons?

Well, as the link I promised you earlier states, there was concern that this new lineup of cartoons begun in 1966 was too violent for children. And, it was feared that children would learn to be violent from watching these shows.

What I noted was similarities between this event and the 1954 Comics Code wrangles, which I have written about previously. Link here for new readers.

Similarities / Correlations:

• Action for Children’s Television ←→ Fredric Wertham & Parents

• Commercial Broadcast Networks ←→ Bill Gaines’ EC Comics

• Comic book artists ←→ Animation studios

• US Government regulation and oversight potential in both cases

ACT was a non-profit organization engaged in “professional advocacy” funded by membership contributions and various foundation grants, rather than an unpaid coalition of parents, religious leaders, and civic organizations, as seen in the 40s and 50s. ACT’s initial focus was stopping the commercialization of children’s TV shows — attempting to remove promoted products or products based on characters in shows. ACT advocated to similar groups of parents who led community efforts against violent Horror and Crime comics in the 1950s.

Violence was the ACT target for Action-Adventure Cartoons of the mid- to late-60s. While advocating with the National Association of Broadcasters to impose limits on what could appear on children’s television, they also engaged in research efforts with the consumer advocacy group, The Center for Science in the Public Interest.

These activities by ACT marked a shift from community-based advocacy to a professional advocacy to the FedGov for policy changes regarding children’s entertainment.

Comic book artists and animation studios are pretty much 1-to-1 correlation on where they stand. They were asked to produce artwork according to a standard given by the comic book publishers and TV networks, respectively.

Bill Gaines and publishers in his vein behaved much like the TV networks asking for these action-oriented, cartoon-violence-laden, prime time shows: both were pushing the envelope as hard as they could, as long as the money was coming hard and fast. Again, we have the culprits who started the fires here with their lust for more fame and money. Kids are consumers to these guys. And the TV Networks? Dual-headed snake, as we’ll see.

The other wild card this time around was FedGov. More than willing to intercede on behalf of children in the 1960s, especially after RFK’s assassination. Ready to create a program to investigate the effects of violence on children, LBJ established the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence to investigate how children might be affected. Urged on by ACT and similar groups, parents, church, and civic groups began to pressure TV Networks to remove violent programming for children. Seeing the writing on the wall, networks ran out the last of the action-driven cartoons they had in the can in the 1969-1970 Saturday Morning Cartoon season.

This is where cartoons shifted back to the early 1960s in flavor, and where Scooby Doo and his comedic compatriots come in to the picture to dominate the 1970s.

So, as Brian pointed out, a bit of entertainment was whittled away for the 7-12 year old set, and was replaced with — nothing. Rather, entertainment types that were geared for a younger cohort (perhaps 5 to 8 years old) replaced some of the material enjoyed by their older siblings.

So, who lost out? If we look at the Generations List, we see that the likely impacted generation for loss of Action-Adventure Cartoons was Gen-X.

Shocker.

• The Greatest Generation: 1914-1934

• The Silent Generation: 1935-1945

• The Baby Boomers: 1946-1956

• Generation Jones: 1957-1967

• Generation X: 1968-1978

• Generation Y: 1979-1989

• The Millennials: 1990-2000

• Generation Z: 2001-2011

This pause in Action-Adventure Cartoons would last a decade, until roughly 1979-1980 when they once again began to emerge. Some of these, like the Japanese-made Space Battleship Yamato anime, named Star Blazers in the US markets, became highly popular as the no-violence iceberg began to thaw.

With Star Blazers, Gen-X was back in the fray to experience the return of the Action-Adventure Cartoon.

What about the two-headed nature of the TV networks? While the Entertainment side of the networks relegated violence to the dustbin for a decade, the News side glorified violence in their broadcasts, showing footage of war, riots, revolutions, and other violent acts.

News shifted from more neutral reporting of events in the 1950s to an ever-more activist and opinionated newsroom, willing to give a listening ear to protests and social causes. In some cases, even give the events a healthy nudge if necessary.1

Thus, it’s possible that no net reduction in actual violence presented to children viewing network television after 1968 occurred due to the actions of the Entertainment and News divisions of any of the Networks, regardless of ACT’s apparent success in sweeping Action-Adventure Cartoons from the map in 1968. Imagine that.

The advantage we have today is that some of these 1966-1970 Action-Adventure Cartoons are available as reruns here and there, and some are even available as collections on DVD or Blu-Ray.

As a Jonny Quest and Space Ghost fan from way back, I strongly recommend you track these down and enjoy, and maybe you will judge them appropriate for your kids as well.