Talk:TSR (company)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Role-playing games (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Board and table games (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Dungeons & Dragons WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dungeons & Dragons-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, or join the discussion, where you can join the project and find out how to help!
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.


Why exactly is this page under Tactical Studies Rules and not TSR? They're far better known by the acronym, and I think they even officially changed their name at some point in the 1980s. -mhr 22:51, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

TSR / Tactical Studies Rules[edit]

Tactical Studies Rules is an appropriate title, especially since [TSR] is claimed by a disambiguation page. Alan De Smet 04:21, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Absolutely noone knows the company as Tactical Studies Rules (the IBM main article is not under International Business Machines). The TSR main article should be TSR, Inc., with appropriate redirect from the TSR disambig page. -- Netoholic 04:09, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Name Change[edit]

If you want to be picky, it wasn't a name change, but a new company. Don Kaye, one of the original owners of Tactical Studies Rules, died of a stroke, and his widow became the owner of 1/3 of a business she had no intention of running. The two remaining owners (Gygax and Brian Blume) formed a new company, TSR Hobbies and transferred as much of the old company to it as they could. Then, Brian Blume's father, Melvin, provided the cash needed to buy Mrs. Kaye's share of the old Tactical Studies Rules, and the old company was dissolved.

This happened in 1975.

They dropped the word Hobbies from the name in 1983.

More history here:

I'll make these changes now.

What was this game?[edit]

A friend of mine bought a TSR fantasy boardgame that we played from time to time. Unfortunately, I can't remember the exact name. I think it was developed in the mid- to late '80s when TSR was trying to make RPG's more mainstream. I think it was called "Dungeon" or "Dragon" or even "Wizards." The game consisted of tiles you laid down as you played. The goal was to get to the center of the dungeon, where treasure was stored. Then you had to try to get out as fast as possible before the dragon caught up with you (or something like that). So it was sort of like a tile-based random dungeon of sorts. Does anyone know the name of this game? Do we have an article on it? Thanks! :-) Frecklefoot | Talk 15:26, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like Dungeon!, which was re-released a few times over the years. --Paul Soth 23:03, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I'm betting the game in question is the 1987 game "DungeonQuest", published by Games Workshop (Originally as "Drakborgen", published by some Dutch(?) company.) It behaves exactly as described: you lay random tiles to try and get into the center. If you remember the game being very difficult (quite frequently no one would win), I'd be almost positive. (The difficulty is part of the charm, our group still drags it out occasionally.) However, it's easy to confuse with the similarlly named "Dungeon", published in 1975 and reprinted every few years in a new edition by TSR through the 1980s. Dungeon had a static, preprinted board. Alan De Smet | Talk 21:48, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

Wizard of the Coast was not sued by TSR[edit]

Wizard of the Coast was not sued by TSR, it was sued by Palladium, check this article by John Tynes or also the press release from Palladium [1] So I deleted the comment about the lawsuit. Moroboshi 16:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Games Made By TSR[edit]

Wouldn't it would seem logical to add a list that tells all of the games TSR published? --

Yes, it would. Frecklefoot | Talk 19:51, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Reasons for TSR's decline[edit]

Cut from article:

"TSR's reckless legal actions led to a precipitous decline in the popularity of its products, as fans turned to competing games such as Rolemaster and Palladium's Fantasy Role-Playing Game, whose publishers were far less restrictive about the creation of derivative works (Palladium later turned out to also be somewhat draconian towards its audience)."

None of the sources say this, and frankly I don't buy it even as a simplified version of the facts. I've never seen any evidence that Rolemaster or Palladium Fantasy was ever playing in the same ballpark saleswise as AD&D. And "reckless" and "draconian" are not exactly NPOV words.

TSR's reckless decline had a lot to do with that AD&D was considered almost a satanic game which book stores banned in the 80s. This due to the account of someone running through the streets with a sword and as rumor had it either killed himself or someone else. Before you state such a fact I really would like to see proof, because I do have a very reliable source. --None-of-the-Above 05:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 ? State what fact? The fact that it was considered a satanic game may have helped sales, but the opinion or at least the noise really died out by the late 1980s and it's pretty doubtful that it was a big part of TSR's failings in the mid-1990s. (They were pretty much bankrupt by the time WotC bought them.)--Prosfilaes 05:53, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Decline in products due to reckless legal actions. I quote, "
GameSpy: So it goes for a couple of years, gets really popular, then in the early '80s a backlash begins. People are saying that the game encourages devil worship and causes kids to commit suicide.

Gygax: That really pushed the sales up. [Laughs]

GameSpy: Well, I know it didn't hurt the game from a sales perspective, but it certainly must have been difficult to laugh with people saying your game is causing kids to commit suicide and that you're teaching them to summon demons.

Gygax: No. I know it's a lie, so it's not difficult at all. I mean, there wasn't a shred of evidence or veracity in any of those claims. I knew it, and a lot of people told me that, including mothers of two of the children who had committed suicide. One of them said the only reason that her son didn't kill himself sooner was because he enjoyed playing Dungeons & Dragons and that this was all just a cock-and-bull story

" [2] --None-of-the-Above 07:11, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't see where that says anything about reckless legal actions. Even when the interview goes on, and he's talking about the suit over Dangerous Journeys, he still doesn't say that it caused a decline in popularity, and more certainly never says that it sent fans to Rolemaster or Palladium. In [3], he says "Eventually, we settled and I'm pleased to say that I think the amount of money it cost them to sue us and pay out in settlement was what really drove TSR under.", but that says nothing about the popularity of the game, and even at face value, it's speculation from an outsider who had no access to hard numbers on the matter.
I don't think I get your point; I'm not sure why you quoted that bit of text.--Prosfilaes 07:32, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The first line under this subsection reads, "TSR's reckless legal actions led to a precipitous decline in the popularity of its products...". I was discrediting it. --None-of-the-Above 08:02, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Right; that's the text I cut from the article.--Prosfilaes 08:06, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't think we are on the same track of thought. I will just leave it with a nevermind. --None-of-the-Above 08:11, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Beginning of the Decline of TSR in 1983[edit]

— Regarding the decline of TSR: I was the Director of Training & Development at TSR in 1983. At the time, TSR, through Brian and Doug Blume, contracted with the American Management Association to teach all managers the "Essential of Management" course, and to upgrade the leadership skills of its senior staff through the AMA's "Presidents' Club Leadership Training" series. This was done to answer criticisms that TSR, while ranked as #22 in Inc. Magazine's Top 1983 500 list of fastest growing companies, lacked the management horsepower to keep up with its growth. I will never forget one afternoon in 1984 when all of the senior management was in an AMA training course that I was facilitating. One of the financial managers had walked into the training room and whispered something to Kevin Blume. Shortly, all four of the senior managers, Kevin, Doug, Brian, and Gary Gygax, left the room and I was told that the training session was to be canceled for the rest of the afternoon. I learned shortly that the message had to do with the fact that TSR was apparently close to a financial crisis, and had to avoid it by what I was told as "financing receivables" to get it through the period. It was then after that week that rumors of layoffs surfaced, and that the beginning of TSR's decline appeared to have started as a result of a year of rapid growth and product start-up and acquisition that surpassed its ability to control its cash flow to keep it solvent. A month after that, layoffs began that saw TSR go from about 400 people worldwide to about a core group of 75 people less than a year later. I hope that this piece of information will contribute to the section regarding "TSR's Downfall." While there, I personally experienced a positive and energetic staff that had visions of growth for the future, encouraged by the financial and management support from Brian Blume and Kevin Blume, and also from Doug Blume who had much of a "backstage" role as the Vice President of Human Resources for the company. He had an influential role in bringing in the development and management programs that drove the evolution of the company.Jekazels 14:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is very interesting and would be useful information in this article. Unfortunately, this is unverifiable information. If there were a published source for this information then we could use it. Until then, it is original research. Val42 13:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Image fair use[edit]

Collapsing all of BetacommandBot's warnings to save space. -Drilnoth (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft, and Spelljammer[edit]

Why aren't they mentioned in the article? LA @ 07:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

They are all a part of Dungeons & Dragons, not separate games, so that's probably why. -Drilnoth (talk) 13:25, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

list of TSR artists available?[edit]

ANy chance someone could start making a list of tsr artists, for this article? (especially for regular artists and artists doing cover artwork)

I could start with a few I already know , like: clyde caldwell jeff easley ... hmm I thought I knew more but I don't, thats why we need a list in this article.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gawdsmak (talkcontribs) 10:20, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's a lot of them on the List of role-playing game artists, and in Category:Dungeons & Dragons artists. (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Dragon Dice[edit]

I had changed the sentence in the lead that mentioned Dragon Dice as a failed attempt to enter the CCG market to refer instead to Spellfire for the self evident reason that Dragon Dice was NOT a CCG, as that stands for "Collectible Card Game", and Spellfire was. For reasons unclear to me Guinness323 has reverted and expanded the reference. While I have no problem with Dragon Dice being mentioned, I fail to see how it is more relevant to TSR's reaction to Magic: The Gathering's success than an actual CCG produced by TSR. I am bringing the issue to the talk page for discussion. --Khajidha (talk) 18:01, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because the sources given specifically list Dragon Dice and hardcover books as the two main reasons for TSR's cash crunch; Spellfire is not mentioned. Realize that the cost of molding dice was inherently more capital intensive than printing paper cards, which is the reason the failure of Dragon Dice cost the company so much money and Spellfire did not.
However, you did raise a good point that Dragon Dice is not a CCG per se, since it uses dice. However, the CCG principle remains the same--the players buy a standard "deck" of randomized dice, then can improve their "deck" by buying booster packs of more powerful dice. I expanded the relevant section to explain the similarities, since TSR was attempting to tap into the CCG market, albeit with a dice game.
I have no objection to adding a mention of Spellfire to the section if you can find a source that states that Spellfire was also part of the financial problem. Guinness323 (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
I think it's a matter of the phrasing - it needs to be clearer that while they were trying to capitalize on the collectability factor, we don't want anyone to get the impression that Dragon Dice was a card game. (talk) 23:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, I have changed the phrasing to "CCG-like game". Guinness323 (talk) 23:13, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

reliable sources....[edit]

ok, so what the heck is a reliable source since no press release has really been given and all info is in the form of forums, blogs, facebook and websites bliacklsited by wikipedia in order to show that the previous edit of TSR trademark being let stagnate, and someone else buying it? reminds me of the days working with the wikiproject and reason i quit while gavin collins was still around. so if someone can find information that is from reliable sources when there is only 2 or 3 sources right now other than US trademark and patent office, then by all means check the edit i made earlier and fix the sources. im not playing the who's is bigger around here anymore so you all figure it out. shadzar-talk 05:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation: TRSI vs TSRI[edit]

Some people seem to think it's impossible to confuse the two. I disagree with them... Palosirkka (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think people looking for TRSI, a demogroup, will happen upon this article on TSR, a game company, and start reading thinking they've happened upon the correct article. If it were me, I'd check to see if I had made a mistake, such as transposing some letters. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 15:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
This page is already disambiguated because of the "(company)" qualifier; previously the same thing was accomplished by having "Inc." in the page name. There is no need for further disambiguation; if you think that it should be associated somewhere, try just the TSR disambiguation page, although I think people would only find their way there due to a misspelling in the first place. (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Author Jon Peterson is not former Congressman Jon Peterson[edit]

I'm not sure how to unlink the references to Jon Peterson to the Wikipedia page for former congressman Jon Peterson, as they are not the same person. Could someone please do that? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thejulyman (talkcontribs) 21:46, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Good point, I fixed it easily enough. :) (talk) 00:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Arduin Grimoire in TSR History[edit]

The text in the TSR History section suggesting that the Arduin Grimoire series pioneered two axis alignment is trivially false: the first Arduin Grimoire did not come out until 1977, and Gygax had written about two-axis alignment a full year earlier in Strategic Review #6 (Feb 1976). There were also numerous critical hit systems published before the Arduin Grimoire. Questionable NPOV when the text calls Arduin the "most popular" unofficial D&D supplement without a sales figure citation - Arduin was one of many such booklets. Replacing these claims with some text about TSR's cease-and-desist practices regarding these unofficial supplements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deconject (talkcontribs) 03:16, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Modern TSR[edit]

The corporation known as TSR today (trademark registration number 4298789) is described at the bottom of the page. The trademark for TSR, Inc. (trademark registration number 1802041) was canceled December 29, 2000. This is all easily verifiable at . Given that there exists a current corporation with the same name in basically the same field, I think it behooves us to mention them and briefly state how they are distinct.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

And I think they should be given a separate article, to avoid the potential for confusion. It's not a continuation, so it shouldn't be on the same page. oknazevad (talk) 23:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Separate article or no, there has to be something on this page that says "by TSR (company), we don't mean TSR (modern company)." It can come in any number of forms, but as I don't feel the new company is worth its own article, the three sentences we have here seem fine. It's not legally a continuation, but it's some of the same people or relatives of the original people laying claim to the heritage of the original, so it's not thematically wrong.--Prosfilaes (talk) 12:45, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Revisiting this, it appears there was some legal trouble regarding this. See here. Apparently, there was issues with using the Gygax name for the magazine, and that Ernie and Luke Gygax are not actually involved with the company, at least, not anymore. oknazevad (talk) 20:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)