Mearls: The core of D&D


log in or register to remove this ad


I agree completely with his point that D&D isn’t -- or wasn't -- one game but a range of games:
I have a theory that in the days of AD&D, there were a few things at work that helped shape D&D. In the AD&D days, the rules had enough leeway for DM judgment calls that a group could bend and twist the rules to fit the DM’s feel for how things should work. One DM could hand wave details, while another would do a lot of research and incorporate as much realism into the game as possible. Thus, while the design might have pointed in one direction, DMs can and did alter the game as they saw fit.

With the release of 3rd Edition, we saw a new trend that 4th Edition only strengthened. The rules became more comprehensive and easier to use. A DM was still free to modify them, but it became a lot easier to just use the rules as written. I think that’s when you started to see divisions among D&D players come to the fore. We always played the game differently, but now that we were a little more reliant on the rules those difference became more obvious.​
On the other hand, I don't agree at all with his game designers' list of mechanics that are essential to D&D. If you sally forth from the Keep on the Borderlands in search of fabulous treasure guarded by monsters in the Caves of Chaos, you're playing D&D -- in essence. AC and hit points have very little to do with it.
 

The interesting thing to me is that every edition of D&D supports all of these elements in one form or another.
I think he's being a bit generous here, but then again, he's not exactly objective. ;)

If you sally forth from the Keep on the Borderlands in search of fabulous treasure guarded by monsters in the Caves of Chaos, you're playing D&D -- in essence.

If you mean those places IN PARTICULAR, yeah, because they're from published D&D sources. If you're making a generalization and just happened to use those names, though, no, I can't agree.
 


D&D 5th Edition, of course! ;)

They were asking questions like this in Dragon while they were playtesting 3e. And they did the nearly the same thing right before 4e.

You'll think the 3 v 4 Edition Wars were a stroll in the park :D

I wonder if the Board Games and Fortune Decks are tests for new mechanics similar to Bot9S?
 

On the other hand, I don't agree at all with his game designers' list of mechanics that are essential to D&D. If you sally forth from the Keep on the Borderlands in search of fabulous treasure guarded by monsters in the Caves of Chaos, you're playing D&D -- in essence. AC and hit points have very little to do with it.

I'm much more in agreement with Mearls' list of mechanics. AC and hp have a lot do to with whether I'm playing D&D or some other fantasy RPG.
 

Gods be good! Mike Mearls, please help make 5th edition as much like AD&D as you possibly can. Please give us a game with simple, basic, easy to run and play mechanics that highlight the early edition of the game and then offer more complex rules as optional books that aren't required for core, basic play. Please, oh please, oh please, oh please, etc....
 

Is it just me, or does alignment seem out of place in that list, in a "one of these things is not like the others" way?

I can see it on a list of elements of D&D, but on a specifically mechanical list, I don't get it.
 

You'll think the 3 v 4 Edition Wars were a stroll in the park :D

I wonder if the Board Games and Fortune Decks are tests for new mechanics similar to Bot9S?

I think, hope, that they are just ways of making money now (and to be blunt, that the fortune cards aren't, so they just die). But ya, another radical push like that for D&D would just fragement the fragments (though it could be kind a fun to do a 4E retroclone).

Now a 5E unification edition...nice idea, but he is going to need more then these little articles for that.
 

Remove ads

Top