Any attempt to read Appendix N is necessarily going to involve some interpretation. If Gary just listed an author’s name and nothing else, how many of their works should you read? And which ones? How literally do you take “et al”? If Gary listed a book in the middle of the series, do you backtrack and add the books before it? And so on.
Knowing that, a question hoves into view: Why are you reading Appendix N?
When I started my run at it in 2012, my goal was to engage with the roots of D&D, to see how the listed authors and works shaped a game that’s been part of my life for decades, and (being a completist by nature) to read everything in Appendix N.
But I didn’t especially enjoy a couple of authors, and grinding out that reading for completeness’ sake was part of what burned me out on the whole project.
A dozen years later…
I’ve been running AD&D 1st Edition for a few months now, and it’s become one of my favorite RPGs. I’ve been back at reading Appendix N for about four months. As with AD&D 1e itself, I view Appendix N’s mix of very specific stuff and stuff that’s open to interpretation as a feature, not a bug. AD&D is a quirky game; Appendix N is a quirky list.
My overriding goal for reading Appendix N is now, “Have fun reading some neat books while exploring the roots of the RPG hobby from a different angle.“
Why these authors? I dunno, read something by each of them and see if anything shakes loose.
Why are there so many stories in the vein of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court here, when that’s not really a major theme in D&D? (And for that matter, why isn’t that specific story on the list?) Or is it a major D&D theme in some way I just haven’t picked up on?
I play to find out. With Appendix N, I’m reading to find out.
If I find out I don’t really like the first book I read by a listed author, I’m probably going to set the rest of their titles off to one side indefinitely and move on to another Appendix N author. If I really dig an author, I’m going to go extracurricular until I’m ready to circle back to Appendix N.
So far, this approach is working and it’s been great fun.
Perhaps the Connecticut Yankee (more broadly, isekai/time travel) genre relevance is this: like D&D players, the protagonists are modern people thrust into an archaic or exotic setting. And at a longer stretch, it’s maybe a tip that D&D players would be justified in using anachronistic knowledge and tactics in-game (just as Martin Padway does in Lest Darkness Fall).
Dang, Roger, that makes a lot of sense! Well said.
I can’t believe that didn’t occur to me! X-D