D&D 5E Open Letter to Mike Mearls from a pro game dev

Raith5 said:

Yep this topic has been done to death (pardon the pun) here an elsewhere. Underpinning the issue is the question of what hit points mean. The DDN (like the preceding editions) clearly state that hp are more than meat (page 22 How to play section of the last playtest).

Click to expand...

HP p22: when you are reduced to 0 HP, it was as a result of a "direct strike", which could not have been a miss. GWF allows you to kill foes entirely via misses, which could not all have been misses, because the foe dies at the end.

It's clear you did not read, nor understand the first thing I wrote.

The contradiction is in GWF and the HP definition. Doesn't matter that HP are "abstract" above 0 HP, they are not abstract at 0 HP.

Lokiare said:

"The determined kobold lifted its sword to block the blow of the great axe coming for its head. the axe slammed into the blade with enough force to drive the it into the kobolfs skull insyantly."

"The lizard folk warrior warded off blow after blow coming from the great sword weilding knight. Each one requiring more and more effort to block in time until the lizard folk warrior was unable to meet a blow. The knight slammed his sword between the lixards ribs killing him."

any questions?
hint:read the definition of hit points a few more times...

Click to expand...

The first one can't be said each and every single time a kobold runs by you.

A kobold naked has a 0 % chance of surviving a single attack of a GWeefer.

Same kobold, but wearing plate armor and a shield? Whoops, still 0 % chance of "blocking" that axe coming for his head.

......

any questions?

read the definition of HP : 0 HP cannot have been due to a miss, therefore it was a hit, therefore a 1st level fighter can never miss any attack vs any low HP foe, ever. Even a dragon with 25 AC, if he has less than the GWF * # of attacks in HP remaining, he might as well not have any dragon scales on whatsoever, for all the good it does him.

GWF negates armor from benefitting those who need it the most : low HP foes.

Have you ever actually played D&D?

Ichneumon said:

Got a tweetable version?

Funnily enough, most issues with damage on a miss go away if you don't let it reduce hp below 1.

Click to expand...

Or if you regard reducing hit points as reducing a rather nebulous thing that amounts to "the things that keep X in a fight" and when they're reduced to zero that's the "And now I can't fight any more" point.

Obryn said:

No, an expert in a topic should have more insight and ability to communicate and argue their point effectively, both of which are lacking in your "open letter."

Click to expand...

To be fair, Mike Mearls is not the most articulate person I've ever encountered, or at least his columns don't make him out to be.

Bluenose said:

Or if you regard reducing hit points as reducing a rather nebulous thing that amounts to "the things that keep X in a fight" and when they're reduced to zero that's the "And now I can't fight any more" point.



To be fair, Mike Mearls is not the most articulate person I've ever encountered, or at least his columns don't make him out to be.

Click to expand...

Game designers' vocalization skills are besides the point, what matters are the rules they produce. The D&D Next rules are largely great, which is precisely why this one sticks out so much.

Your first point about "I can't fight anymore" is kind of absurd too, it's not like kobolds can't fight anymore vs any other opponent who missed them, it's only this one fighting style guy who tires them so quickly, that they just keel over and die, despite the fact that their weapon flew right over their head.

After a while, that gets old. If you play the game like a game of chess, sure, it doesn't matter that the narrative doesn't make sense, that you've killed hundreds of foes by exhausting them to death after a handful of seconds. But that kind of absurdity does matter to many of us, who also realize that if you're going to narrate why missing is so tiring vs the Gweefer, why is nothing else the kobold does all day tiring in any way, whatsoever, including fighting any other combatant versed in some other fighting style.

Just wait until a DM-run Ogre Warrior uses his pike to kill your wizard hiding behind your fighter with Protector, with 100% certainty, and no benefit or "protection" offered by that fighter.

When the DM kills your PC by asking you how many HP do you have? 5? "Ok, sorry the ogre kills you now", without rolling even a D20.

The dice need to have their say in D&D. GWF bypasses the agency of both the D20 and the W dice. It's terrible.

This open letter is old, I think. It was posted here last year some time, or something very like it was (though under a different user name): I remember the "Bad for America" tagline, because then as now my response is "Well, I live in Australia".

EDIT: Here are the two posts, under the user name "Burninator" (who is also by his/her own testimony an AAA game designer, perhaps closely related to [MENTION=6674889]Gorgoroth[/MENTION]?):

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...t-poll/page4&p=6211739&viewfull=1#post6211739

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...t-poll/page8&p=6212401&viewfull=1#post6212401

Gorgoroth said:

The best stand-ins for this have been mentioned many times:
1) Cleave on a crit or a kill
2) +2 to damage
3) Damage advantage (benefits higher W weapons more, which is great)
4) Brutal 2

Any of those things also built on hitting, or hitting harder, or hitting more often.

Click to expand...

Summarising them likes this is great. Thanks.

I understand you are passionate about this topic, and you have every right to be. An open letter stating your opposition to a current ruling is fine, but what is equally important is to gain the support of your fellow players, lets face it - this would have been a better thread if you had more people agreeing with you than attacking you for your writing style or supposed arrogance. It would have echoed your message stronger and further if you had toned down what may be perceived as self-importance.

Unfortunately this topic has closed threads down in the past so it is a rather sensitive issue, so a forceful and IMO with a rather arrogant tone you've instead alienated those who would rather support your cause. I personally agree with you, I would prefer the playtest packet ruling not to make it in the final product, but shouting out one's salary, ones credentials and calling oneself pro does not help garner the support one would want and perhaps need to help push one's objective through.

And here is to hoping that Mike Mearls considers what you have to say - not because of your salary, credentials or because you are a pro-designer, but because it makes sounds sense.

I wonder why the OP feels the need to argue his point here, as his target is elsewhere.

Seems a waste of time to me. Good ego trip though.

Open letters are usually posted in public places, as they're meant to be read by more than just the addressee. Hence the openness. WotC people visit these forums as well as their own, so it's as good a place as any to post it.

For what it's worth, he also posted it on the DDN forums at Wizards, but it was locked there. People kept hounding him about the "professional game developer" thing.

And about that, MtlKnight/Gorgoroth, you may think that claim lends you some authority, but with your refusal to publicly disclose the games you've worked on, all it does is hide the issue. In the parlance of the street, it really is time to "put up or shut up" about your professional credentials. It's just taking attention away from any actual good points you make.

thewok said:

And about that, MtlKnight/Gorgoroth, you may think that claim lends you some authority, but with your refusal to publicly disclose the games you've worked on, all it does is hide the issue. In the parlance of the street, it really is time to "put up or shut up" about your professional credentials.

Click to expand...

Actually, I disagree. The whole thing is just an appeal to authority, so should be ignored. Either the arguments made are good ones and should be considered, or they are not and should not.

(And, FWIW, I would much rather see "damage on a miss" removed from the game. Though my argument is much simpler that the OP's: I just don't like it.)

Mistwell said:

OK, that's it, I am reversing my prior opinion. I now want Damage on a Miss in the game. I want it so, so much now.

Click to expand...

Dammit [MENTION=6674889]Gorgoroth[/MENTION], you've gone and made me agree with [MENTION=2525]Mistwell[/MENTION]!