Mike Mearls interview at Slashdot

Morrus · Jul 18, 2012

Mike Mearls is the Senior Manager for the Dungeons and Dragons Design Team. He's been with D&D publishers Wizards of the Coast (a subsidiary of Hasbro) since 2005, Before that he was a free-lance game writer and designer. In this conversation with Slashdot editor Rob "samzenpus" Rozeboom, he talks about changes in the latest version of D&D and how the company interacts with players. Stuff we've heard before - the interview is clearly aimed at people just hearing about the new version of D&D.

Watch the video here.

darjr · Jul 18, 2012

Slashdot's Rob Rozeboom Interviews D&D Designer Mike Mearls (video) - Slashdot

Can't embed it. Haven't listened yet.

Nytmare · Jul 18, 2012

What!? I can't add a d30 roll to my post?

How unfair is that?

thecasualoblivion · Jul 18, 2012

Can't watch at work, busy. Are there any new revelations, or is it solely what we've heard before?

LightPhoenix · Jul 18, 2012

I'd say it was pretty light on content, but overall an interesting listen into the "meta" side of the design. Of course, being a Senior Manager this is kind of expected.

Mike starts off talking a bit about the purpose of Next, specifically in the context of 3E and 4E. He also touches a bit on the theory of mechanics - for example, saving throws moved to abilities to make more sense in the world.

He goes on to talk about feedback - one of the main missions is to connect with all players, referencing back to the first question. Especially he mentions the dichotomy between seeing problems from a designer's point of view versus a player's. He gives an example of critical hits not being exciting.

Haldrik · Jul 18, 2012

Id feel better about the design decisions if I could see the same feedback that the designers are looking at. Mainly polls and syntheses. The Wizards.com website is actually pretty good at showing the onsite results. But we have no idea about the feedback from elsewhere. Some decisions are truly shocking (resurrecting vancian, killing defenses - so only players who choose noncasters get the satisfaction of rolling dice to determine their own fate, and so on). If I could see the feedback from other places truly represent the majority of players, I would feel better about these kinds of decisions. At least I can be happy for those who want it, even if I myself dont understand it. As of now. Im just going on trust.

Flobby · Jul 19, 2012

Haldrik said:
Id feel better about the design decisions if I could see the same feedback that the designers are looking at. Mainly polls and syntheses. The Wizards.com website is actually pretty good at showing the onsite results. But we have no idea about the feedback from elsewhere. Some decisions are truly shocking (resurrecting vancian, killing defenses - so only players who choose noncasters get the satisfaction of rolling dice to determine their own fate, and so on). If I could see the feedback from other places truly represent the majority of players, I would feel better about these kinds of decisions. At least I can be happy for those who want it, even if I myself dont understand it. As of now. Im just going on trust.

Actually there are many spells that require an attack roll in D&D Next. FWIW

ShadowDenizen · Jul 19, 2012

Thanks for the link!

Not much new, content-wise, but interesting to see things from a semi-new perspective.

The Wizards.com website is actually pretty good at showing the onsite results. But we have no idea about the feedback from elsewhere.

Personally speakng, I wish there were some more concrete ways of giving feedback other than replying to polls or posting in general threads.

I think people, if given the chance, would happily send in playtest reports and give concrete feedback about what worked and didn't work for their respective groups.

Even if WotC picked a percentage of diverse groups to send in "Playtest Reports" to be collated with specific commentary, thoughts and feedback, it would still be better than the generic polls they post, IMHO.

If I could see the feedback from other places truly represent the majority of players, I would feel better about these kinds of decisions.

I completely agree.

Haldrik · Jul 19, 2012

Flobby said:
Actually there are many spells that require an attack roll in D&D Next. FWIW

Meh. Making spells inconsistent is even worse. This is supposed to be the “simple” - easy for newbies to pick up - Core.

VinylTap · Jul 19, 2012

Haldrik said:
Meh. Making spells inconsistent is even worse. This is supposed to be the “simple” - easy for newbies to pick up - Core.

"Not only do i want my cake, but I don't want anyone else to get a slice either"

It sounds like they're going to expand spells to vancian as well as 'cast on demand' . The way I've been rationalizing it is, instead of your wizard having to carry around a crossbow all the time, for when he runs out of spells, you can just do what wizard's are suppose to do, and blast things with spells.

I'm not a huge fan of the vancian system myself, but it gets better the more you look in it. Pathfinder has used the cantrip mechanic for awhile now, and it works pretty well.