The world of tabletop role-playing games (RPGs) has long been a creative and collaborative space where gamers share ideas, innovate, and build upon one another’s work. However, recent developments surrounding the term “Braunstein” have raised concerns about the suppression of free speech within the hobby. Griffith Morgan, the creator of the documentary Secrets of Blackmoor, has reportedly threatened hobbyists with lawsuits over the use of the term “Braunstein,” claiming exclusive rights to it. This situation echoes the actions of Wizards of the Coast (WOTC), who have faced criticism in the past for attempting to exert control over creative content within the RPG community.
What is “Braunstein”?
To understand the current controversy, it’s important to know what “Braunstein” represents in the context of RPG history. The term originates from the early 1960s and refers to a genre-defining game run by David Wesely, a member of the Minnesota gaming group that would eventually give rise to Dungeons & Dragons. Wesely’s Braunstein games were a groundbreaking fusion of role-playing and wargaming, setting the stage for the development of modern RPGs. Over the decades, “Braunstein” has become a widely recognized term used to describe a particular style of open-ended, role-playing wargame.
Morgan’s Claim to “Braunstein”
Griffith Morgan, who produced Secrets of Blackmoor, a documentary chronicling the early history of RPGs, has recently made headlines by asserting that he holds exclusive rights to the term “Braunstein.” Morgan has gone so far as to threaten lawsuits against hobbyists and creators who use the term in their projects, products, or discussions. His justification appears to stem from his desire to produce a monetized product under the “Braunstein” name, which he claims would be diluted or undermined by others using the term.
Many in the RPG community see this move as an attempt to capitalize on a term that has been part of the public lexicon for decades, predating any claim Morgan might have to it. This has sparked outrage, with some arguing that it amounts to a suppression of free speech. If Morgan’s claim were to be legally upheld, it could set a dangerous precedent for other historical terms and concepts in the RPG world, potentially limiting creativity and innovation.
Parallels to Wizards of the Coast (WOTC)
Morgan’s actions bear a striking resemblance to controversies involving Wizards of the Coast (WOTC), the company behind Dungeons & Dragons. In recent years, WOTC has made several attempts to exert greater control over the RPG community, most notably through their licensing agreements. The introduction of the Open Gaming License (OGL) 1.1, which aimed to impose stricter rules and royalties on third-party creators, sparked widespread backlash. The RPG community saw this move as an attempt to monopolize creative content, stifle competition, and suppress independent creators’ voices.
In both cases, the actions taken by Morgan and WOTC are seen as efforts to assert ownership over foundational elements of the RPG hobby—be it a term like “Braunstein” or the mechanics and lore associated with Dungeons & Dragons. Such attempts to control the language, rules, and creative expressions within the community are viewed by many as a form of censorship and an assault on free speech.
The Broader Implications for the RPG Community
Morgan’s aggressive stance raises important questions about who owns the language of the hobby. If the term “Braunstein,” a word with deep roots in RPG history, can be monopolized by a single individual, what other terms, concepts, or game mechanics might also be claimed? The RPG community thrives on a culture of sharing, remixing, and building upon each other’s ideas. Restricting this freedom threatens the very foundation of what makes the hobby so vibrant and diverse.
Moreover, this kind of control can have a chilling effect on creativity. New creators, intimidated by the threat of legal action, may be discouraged from developing new ideas or participating in the community discourse. This is especially troubling given the collaborative nature of tabletop RPGs, where ideas are constantly exchanged, and innovation is key to keeping the hobby fresh and engaging.
Defending Free Speech in the RPG Community
The RPG community has a rich tradition of collaboration and openness. Defending this tradition against attempts to restrict free speech is essential. Morgan’s claim over “Braunstein,” much like WOTC’s previous attempts to exert control over third-party content, highlights the need for a unified response from the community.
Hobbyists, creators, and fans must continue to speak out against such monopolistic claims and support one another in their right to freely use and build upon the shared language and concepts that have defined the hobby for decades. Legal claims over commonly understood terms or ideas, especially those with historical significance, should be carefully scrutinized and, if necessary, challenged in court.
The threat of lawsuits over the term “Braunstein” by Griffith Morgan is more than just a legal maneuver—it represents an attempt to control the narrative and history of the RPG community. This is eerily similar to past actions by Wizards of the Coast, and both cases highlight the dangers of allowing any entity to assert ownership over foundational elements of a creative and collaborative hobby. The RPG community must stand together to protect its rich history and defend the free exchange of ideas that has made it so enduring and beloved.
