D&D 5E EN World Interview With Mike Mearls, Lead Designer of D&D Next

Gaming Tonic · May 22, 2012

I could clue you in on a few things but with things in flux the way they are I don't know how much it would help. In the case of specialization the first playtest material referenced it but no rules, the second set had specialization and I liked the way it worked for the most part. The open playtest material sounds like it will not include it as part of the fighter or cleric class but as a component of various themes. This is a better option because it allows more freedom in how a player builds their character. Some of the fighters abilities were in a bonus here or there. Might not sound like much but when AC and hit bonuses don't scale for levels it is a huge advantage and makes the fighter fight really well. That is what they should be doing. The long rest and the short rest were nothing like what you would even think about as a surge mechanic and I am sure they are to change so I do not want to cause scandal since that i a hot button issue and I know it is likely to be different than what I experience when the open playtest is released in a few days.

The fighter had hp, ac, hit, and damage and a blitzkrieg ability that was my favorite thing that I saw. It allowed the fighter to really create a dramatic tide changing moment when the player chose. I don't want to get into the specifics of how it worked because that is likely to change if it is still part of the class when the open playtest comes out. Everything is up for being changed, is the motto that I keep hearing from designers.

The rogue had skills, skills, sneak attack. Sneak attack worked much like it has in previous editions handing out extra damage when the opponent was at a disadvantage.

I did not see anything besides the fighter, wizard, rogue, and cleric.

YRUSirius · May 22, 2012

Thanks for the info so far.

If you ask me, I like every bit of info I can get, because it shows me their way of thought. I know, everything is in flux - but still...

-YRUSirius

HRG · May 22, 2012

With the understanding that it's still very early and things are subject to change, are there any bits you could share about monsters or monster design (though I don't expect monster building rules would be available this early in the process)? Are monster stat blocks as well organized and easy to use in play as they were in 4e? Do they still have colorful and unique attacks and abilities? That and ease of creating new beasties is something I really hope carries over.

Dire Bare · May 22, 2012

Mark CMG said:
My first question would be if any of the materials distributed by WotC had an OGL attached to them.

It's a bit early. There's no point in releasing an OGL or GSL until the game is complete.

It'd be nice if WotC announced that there will be a 5e OGL similar to the 3e one, but I imagine they are taking this aspect of the game slowly and carefully, as the original OGL was too open for WotC's business needs, and the 4e GSL was too restrictive and a bit of a PR disaster (not to mention launching a major competitor, Pathfinder).

TarionzCousin · May 22, 2012

Gaming Tonic said:
I don't want to get into the specifics of how it worked because that is likely to change if it is still part of the class when the open playtest comes out. Everything is up for being changed, is the motto that I keep hearing from designers.

On a scale of 1 (hated it) to 10 (loved it) how much have you liked:

1. Basic D&D
2. 1E
2. 2E
3. 3E
4. 4E
5. 5E

Obviously I really want to know how much you liked 5E, but knowing your D&D preferences should help to put your opinion in perspective. B-)

P.S. Thanks for sharing.

Mark CMG · May 22, 2012

Dire Bare said:
It's a bit early. There's no point in releasing an OGL or GSL until the game is complete.

Even this early, they would need to be using it to have access to other people's OGC if they are planning to leveraging the full potential of the OGL (or even the GSL, for that matter). It's unlikely they are looking at other people's OGC, or seriously planning to use the OGL, if we don't see it in use with the playtest materials going forward. If the designers are serious about using the OGL they'll want access to a decade's worth of OGC from hundreds of designers, some clearly top notch and many who are former WotC designers. It's not impossible that they want to create a new game whole cloth and only then slap the OGL on it but that seems a bit like choosing to take the double black diamond run while carrying your skis under your arm.

Haldrik · May 22, 2012

Gaming Tonic said:
I could clue you in on a few things but with things in flux the way they are I don't know how much it would help. In the case of specialization the first playtest material referenced it but no rules, the second set had specialization and I liked the way it worked for the most part. The open playtest material sounds like it will not include it as part of the fighter or cleric class but as a component of various themes. This is a better option because it allows more freedom in how a player builds their character. Some of the fighters abilities were in a bonus here or there. Might not sound like much but when AC and hit bonuses don't scale for levels it is a huge advantage and makes the fighter fight really well. That is what they should be doing. The long rest and the short rest were nothing like what you would even think about as a surge mechanic and I am sure they are to change so I do not want to cause scandal since that i a hot button issue and I know it is likely to be different than what I experience when the open playtest is released in a few days.

The fighter had hp, ac, hit, and damage and a blitzkrieg ability that was my favorite thing that I saw. It allowed the fighter to really create a dramatic tide changing moment when the player chose. I don't want to get into the specifics of how it worked because that is likely to change if it is still part of the class when the open playtest comes out. Everything is up for being changed, is the motto that I keep hearing from designers.

The rogue had skills, skills, sneak attack. Sneak attack worked much like it has in previous editions handing out extra damage when the opponent was at a disadvantage.

I did not see anything besides the fighter, wizard, rogue, and cleric.

Races.

Did the racial abilities have a penalty?

Do you know what the racial modifiers are?

Gaming Tonic · May 22, 2012

TarionzCousin said:
On a scale of 1 (hated it) to 10 (loved it) how much have you liked:

1. Basic D&D
2. 1E
2. 2E
3. 3E
4. 4E
5. 5E

Obviously I really want to know how much you liked 5E, but knowing your D&D preferences should help to put your opinion in perspective.

P.S. Thanks for sharing.

Basic D&D: 3 (deadly and elves ranked supreme)
1st Edition: 3
2nd Edition: 5
3rd Edition: 4
4th Edition: 3 (This was much higher until it was over supplemented)
5th Edition: 5 ( I see brilliance with the melding of mechanics, still too early to really tell how it turns out. I give one extra point for my excitement.

Vyvyan Basterd · May 22, 2012

Mearls said:
"Most themes offer a mix of abilities, but you can choose to focus on one part of the game if you want to. Still, a guy who takes a combat-based is only marginally better than a character who takes a theme that focuses elsewhere."

Mark CMG said:
So, if class is mostly about combat, and backgrounds engender the roleplaying aspects of the roleplaying game, though themes can be about either . . . but it is worth noting that someone not taking a combat theme will be less combat proficient (which seems obvious but seemed important enough to the design process to be pointed out) . . .

None of us have the context in which this was said (except maybe GamingTonic), so I speculate as much as you in my take. The way I read his combat was with a stress on the word marginally as a reference to the 'flatter math' the designers are trying to deliver.

As a DM who's had issues with power gap that lead to large problems for my group, I take this comment in a positive view that a player can choose to focus on any of the three pillars to get a marginal advantage in their area of expertise, while still not lagging too far behind in other areas. I understand that some people will still not like this, even if my interpretation is correct, as they might want, for example, a character that can't fight his way out of a paper bag but can smooth talk his way out of trouble like no one else. My players would certainly enjoy something more balanced that will allow for customization without worrying too much that their character will be negated in other pillars by trap choices.

Old_Skool · May 22, 2012

Gryphon04 said:
Sheadunne,
Your right healing, that is to say the magical healing clerics provide, should be a rarity. Everyone heals over time without magic even in the real world. i.e. rest, recuperation, nourishment, first aid, etc. The designers are simply creating a mechanic to reflect this is all. Will they get it right? Well that is what the playtest is for. Maybe we can ask Game Tonic how it works and if he likes it.

I disagree. Magical healing has been the standard healing method of D&D, and all fantasy RPGs, for decades. If you want to play a low-magic (or no-magic) game setting, you should be able to...but such settings will be the exception and not the rule.