Bugbears. Jack-O-Bears. Same Same?

 I barely manage to make a post a couple of times a month lately. Besides my very casual approach to the blog these days (I make pretty much no attempt to advertise it in any way. If I was I would comment at Grognardia and other popular old school spots on the reg). Plus I work in health care which means often 50 hour weeks on the job. But one of the handful (and yes you could count them on one hand and have change left over) folk who are kind enough to comment on the occasional post had a comment on my post earlier today, and I thought "what the hell" rather than bury my reply in comments I'd make it a short post. Go a little deeper in the weeds on Bugbears. 

Not a bugbear. More
 like a Walktapus

The thing you're calling a "Runequest bugbear" is a jack-o-bear, a Chaotic critter that looks and acts less like a D&D bugbear than the similarly chimerical owlbear does. Just because the names all include "bear" doesn't make them the same thing, or even related. Doesn't even work as an attempted joke.

I could say "Fair enough," especially when it comes to my weak (I am a gamer after all) attempts at humor. But to the because the names all include "bear" doesn't make them the same thing, or even related I feel like I have to blow a time out whistle, or at least throw out a less shrill au contraire mon frair. There is a clear connection between the D&D bugbear and the Runequest jack-o-thing. 

Here is the current D&D bugbear.

Here is the 1st edition version.

All good. Now here is the earliest known depiction of a D&D bugbear.

Dang. That thing has a pumpkin for a head! 

OK, the crux of the matter. I am no D&D historian. And I certainly care less about the historical context of gaming things than I did when I started this blog. Though it's fun to walk down memory lane now and again. And it is memory lane, seeing as I pretty much was living it in my early gaming. As an adult I really didn't follow much of what was going on in the decades between my teens and when I first noticed the OSR about 10 years ago or so. But in my early to later teens I was in the thick of it. 

My earliest gaming outside of my friends was at Aero Hobbies, one two hobby shops in Southern California that specialized in D&D stuff and every other new RPG on the scene. I was playing games there starting around 1978 or so. By then the older locals were into Runequest, Traveller, Bushido, Empire of the Petal Throne. Anything but D&D. Some of the folk there would in some OSR circles be considered minor celebrity. And the older folk there certainly had plenty to say about the industry. I mean, we were surrounded by all the new books, and a galaxy of early miniatures. 

So, on bugbears my understanding is this: The artwork of "bugbear, ghoul, and friends" bugbear was a misunderstanding of Gygax's description (an "oval head shaped like a pumpkin") or some such. So there you go. Instead of a big hairy Chewbacca wanna be, you got that monstrosity. 

Mini's were produced before Gaz could get on top of it, like so:

So sometime during the populating of Glorantha, the powers that be suggested they come up with some creatures that already existed as mini's you could find. Things like Griffons were a no-brainer. Plenty of mythical creatures from D&D getting made. And maybe Prax is filled with herds of everything BUT horses because you could find packs of other kinds of hooved animals at the 5 and dime. Antelopes and boars and so forth. 

But this mini, this pumpkin bear thing (or another like it) inspired the creation of the Jack-O-Bear, as seen on the cover of the campaign book below:

Now, bugbears aren't known as spellcasters. But pretty much everything in Runequest is a spell caster. I think Jack's had some paralyzing power or another. They are chaos creatures and therefore are part of a solid ethos/grouping in that setting. And whereas D&D bugbears are fairly oricish/ogreish in general (big thugs who crack your skull for laughs), the Gloranthan ones at least appear (modernly) more bestial in nature. 

Just because the names all include "bear" doesn't make them the same thing, or even related. Doesn't even work as an attempted joke.

Wellll..., my weak jokes aside, there is a very clear line between the creatures. More than just the word "bear." The similarity to an Owlbear things is fine, but if you look at pics like the one of the Griffin mountain cover, they weren't meant to be four legged animals. I know bears can stand on hind legs, but that thing is blocking a spear and casting a spell. They were literally using the early D&D mini, a two-legged humanoid, as the basis. And the mini does not have a bear body. It looks more to me like they used a shambling mound mold and added the pumpkin. Regardless of what they make them out to be in later edition. That old stuff does still kind of count (if you are anywhere near my age anyway). So the joke, such as it is, has some validity. 

Or not. But fair enough. 

Cheers