Tondro attacks the original creators writing, “...But that game content also includes a virtual catalog of insensitive and derogatory language, words that are casually hurtful to anyone with a physical or mental disability, or who happens to be old, fat, not conventionally attractive, indigenous, Black, or a woman.”

So they're attacking the people you're trying to court as your new playerbase, got it.

“...Some people have charitably ascribed this language to authors working from bad assumptions. In the 1970s, historical wargamers in America were predominately white, middle-class men; it isn’t surprising that they would dub a class of soldiers the ‘fighting-man.’

Firstly, being predomintely white men is not a bad thing. Secondly..."fighting-man" is your go-to, very first example of "insensitive and derogatory language?" You fucking loser.

...It’s an unfortunate fact that women seldom appear in original D&D, and when they do, they’re usually portrayed disrespectfully.

This coming from the 'make every woman look like a man, be a violent freak, and be gay' crowd. The "misogynists" were infinitely more respectful of women than you freaks are.

Tondro went on, “Slavery appears in original D&D not as a human tragedy that devastated generations over centuries, but as a simple commercial transaction.”

GOOD. Because that's how it would be treated, if you're in a world with active slavery. Obviously. These fuckers piss me off.

“The cultural appropriation of original D&D..."

Is what you're doing right the fuck now, locust.

...staggering; Gods, Demi-gods and Heroes (not reprinted in this book) includes game statistics for sacred figures revered by more than a billion people around the world,” he wrote. “Were players expected to fight Vishnu, one of the principal deities of Hinduism, kill him, and loot his ‘plus 3 sword of demon slaying’?”

Why not? Also...so you removed content? Gotcha. So it's worth than useless and, if I wanted that edition, I should just go get the originals.

"...It has slowly become more inclusive, and as the player base has become more diverse, the pool of creators who make the game has expanded to include people with a broader range of identities and backgrounds. As these new creators make the game more welcoming, the game has attracted new fans who, in turn, continue to make the game more inclusive...

All I'm hearing is, yes, definitely get the old original stuff if you want to play D&D.

It was not just Tondro who attacked Kuntz and the other original creators such as Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson, but so did Jon Peterson who penned a Foreword for the book.

How many forewords do you need attacking the people who created D&D? Have some class. I know it's too much to ask, but come on...

“Note that the ‘Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns’ that make up original D&D were created and sold to a wargaming community that was almost exclusively white, middle-class men. The rules compiled here offer little by way of roles for other players, nor indeed for anyone who wouldn’t easily identify with a pulp sword-and-sorcery hero.

There we go with the 'white men bad' again, no surprise. Also...it's fucking sword and sorcery, what do you expect? "D&D doesn't offer enough to people who don't like D&D!"

Especially before 1974, the rules made light of slavery, in addition to including other harmful content.

Yeah, no such thing, at least in this context.

To reiterate the disclaimer Wizards of the Coast includes on legacy D&D content, ‘these depictions were wrong then and are wrong today. The content is presented as it was originally created...

Except when it isn't.

...because to do otherwise would be the same as claiming these prejudices never existed.'”

Alright, at least we get to end on an almost sensible note. Don't change history, history was real and happened. Of course, even that is still an outright attack at the original content.