D&D 5E Is there beef between Mearls and Cook?

Waller · Oct 8, 2017

Timeline, IIRC. Correct me if I'm wrong.

- Monte Cook joins TSR in 1994
- Monte Cook works for WotC as one of the lead designers on D&D 3E
- Mearls does third party work for Fiery Dragon Productions in 2001
- Cook leaves WotC and forms Malhavoc Press
- Cook hires Mearls on various 3rd party d20 projects
- Mearls gets hired by WotC in 2005 to work on D&D 4E
- Cook returns to WotC in 2011 as lead designer on D&D 5E
- Cook leaves WotC in 2012 citing creative differences and Mearls becomes lead designer
- Cook forms Monte Cook Games
- Bruce Cordell leaves WotC after 20 years and joins Monte Cook games

I wonder what would have happened if Cook hadn't left. Seems there was some creative conflict there.

DEFCON 1 · Oct 8, 2017

I believe Cook left because the full-time contract that WotC would have had him sign would include the policy that any design work that Cook came up with during that time would be owned by WotC, even if it wasn't directly related to D&D. Cook obviously had an issue with that, which is why he didn't sign on to become a full-time employee and left to form his own company (where he created the game he probably was thinking of while working at WotC and which he obviously didn't want to give over.)

As far as Cordell is concerned... many full-time WotC employees of the D&D department tended to get laid off following the release of a new edition, presumably because they had worked there long enough that they had larger contracts that just were not able to be sustained by the budget of the department. The "purge" of the D&D department was a well-known phenomena that happened several times. However, this time leading out of 5E a trio of long-time employees all voluntarily left, rather than get laid off. James Wyatt moved over to the Magic: The Gathering department, Rodney Thompson left to join a video game company (Bungie?) and Bruce Cordell left to join his old friend Monte Cook and work for MCG. This made the departmental purge of long-time employees unnecessary.

Tony Vargas · Oct 9, 2017

Corrosive said:
Is there beef between Mearls and Cook?

Beef comes from cows, and there could certainly have been some Sacred Cows involved...

Corrosive said:
Timeline, IIRC. Correct me if I'm wrong.
- Cook returns to WotC in 2011 as lead designer on D&D 5E
- Cook leaves WotC in 2012 citing creative differences

I wonder what would have happened if Cook hadn't left. Seems there was some creative conflict there.

I vaguely remember Cook pulling some gaffe or other in L&L leading into or early in the Next playtest cycle... and not sticking around long thereafter.

Cook was a major contributor to 3e, so a 5e with him as lead designer may have been even more 3.x/PF-like. Though, presumably, without the option bloat and player-'Entitlement'-over-DM-Empowerment.

LordEntrails · Oct 9, 2017

That's your evidence of a "beef"?

People come and go from jobs for hundreds of reasons, and vary rarely is it because of a conflict with one person.

Come on, this is nothing but unfounded speculation that will never yield anything positive for the community.

Enevhar Aldarion · Oct 9, 2017

I had already forgotten that Cook has started out as lead on 5E. I also remember that all that talk about 5E being modular stopped after he left. Maybe that was the creative differences? WotC went in another route than the modular talk, so Cook left to do his own thing.

transtemporal · Oct 10, 2017

Cook hates Mearls over a bungled assassination and tried to have him whacked, but Mearls was onto him and got out in time, staying off the grid by moving to Goa, India. But then a russian assassin found him and his girlfriend so he went on the offensive taking the fight to Cook and his Treadstone cronies. All of these facts are pretty easy to discern if you just pay attention.

clearstream · Oct 10, 2017

Tony Vargas said:
Cook was a major contributor to 3e, so a 5e with him as lead designer may have been even more 3.x/PF-like. Though, presumably, without the option bloat and player-'Entitlement'-over-DM-Empowerment.

Huh? What player-entitlement over DM-empowerment? What edition did that arise in?

Jacob Lewis · Oct 10, 2017

I thought it was braised pheasant, or a pork tenderloin at best. Side dishes not counted, of course. And no sauce.

Croesus · Oct 10, 2017

vonklaude said:
Huh? What player-entitlement over DM-empowerment? What edition did that arise in?

Supposedly in 3.x, as it attempted to have a rule for everything. I believe Monte Cook even stated early on that one of the design philosophies was that 3rd Edition would protect players from bad GMs, by reducing the areas where GMs needed to make judgment calls.

I always thought the 3.x "player entitlement" vs. "GM entitlement" conflict was overstated. That said, 5E clearly has a different design vision - rulings, not rules - from 3.x, which is one reason I like the current edition over all the previous ones. At the end, GMing 3.x felt like work, while GMing 5E feels fun, IMNSHO.