D&D 5E D&D Next Design Goals (Article)

[FireLance]

To shred some metaphors: if the math is balanced on a razor's edge that razor will eventually slice the system to ribbons.

Nice, but not terribly useful, unless your definition of "razor's edge" is different from mine.

For the record, mine would be something along the lines of:
Your 3rd-level PCs fight a 4th-level encounter -> You die a horrible death!
Your 3rd-level PCs fight a 3rd-level encounter while armed with 2nd-level equipment -> You die a horrible death!

Although individual players may obsess about the difference of a +1 or a -1 to hit from the "expected norm" (however they define that to be), it has never been the difference between certain success and certain failure in any game system I've ever encountered, and definitely not in any edition of D&D I've ever DMed or played.

Don't mistake mathematical transparency and good guidelines for enforced balance! The former tells you what is likely to happen. The latter doesn't say anything; it just kills you if you step out of line.

 

[FireLance]

The money quote for me is, "if the math works but the game doesn't feel like D&D, we've failed."

The great thing is that after so many editions, so many things feel like D&D, so it's an easy target.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

WotC just posted a Mike Mearls article here. It's an interesting look at the core target they are aiming for.

The money quote for me is, "if the math works but the game doesn't feel like D&D, we've failed."

Thaumaturge.

If the math doesn't work and the game isn't balanced, then 5E has failed at being 4E and fails at reunification.

 

[johnsemlak]

Umm, 'grats on proving my point. The point I was making is that "Feels like D&D" is 100% subjective.


I wouldn't have as much of a problem with Monte if he showed the least bit of indication he has actually cracked the cover of the 4E PHB or even looked at a 4E character sheet. The Passive Perception thing irritates me because it is pretty disingenous of Mike Mearls to claim they want to reuinify the player base when they install a guy as lead designer that doesn't know the first thing about one of the things they are trying to unify. Monte is a good guy, he is actually from about sixty miles from where my dad grew up, but if he wants to be a part of the grand reunification, he needs to put a little more effort into it. A surgeon that is going to reattach both arms and both legs to a patient, but doesn't know the first thing about the left arm, SHOULD PROBABLY LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT THE LEFT ARM.

Its not really believable that monte isn't familiar with 4e.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I really liked that article, thanks for posting it, Thaumaturge.

There does seem to be a contradiction in it though - "More importantly, we must look beyond the mechanics of the game to focus on the archetypes, literary tropes, and cultural elements that built D&D. We must build a fighter that resonates as a warrior, not one simply cobbled together with mechanics pilfered from D&D's past."

I'm not sure how Mike can square this aim, which seems to be going in an entirely new direction, with the desire for reunification.

 

[Doug McCrae]

A surgeon that is going to reattach both arms and both legs to a patient, but doesn't know the first thing about the left arm, SHOULD PROBABLY LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT THE LEFT ARM.

Relax, Mike'll tell 'im where the left arm goes.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Its not really believable that monte isn't familiar with 4e.

If he is actually familiar with it he gives it a level of disrespect that is actually worse than not having a clue what he is talking about.

The money quote for me is, "if the math works but the game doesn't feel like D&D, we've failed."

OK. I'm going to add two corollaries to that.

1: If the math doesn't work you have failed. Period.

2: If the game feels like the D&D I played in the nineties I am not going to buy it. Because the D&D we (as in my group in specific) were playing then? Sucked. For that matter if it feels like high level D&D from the oughties I am not going to DM it and probably not going to play it.

 

[Umbran]

Ladies and gents, Page 1 of this thread already shows signs of edition warring. Need I mention yet again that we don't want to see that any more around here?

Please, don't go to that dark, nasty, thoroughly nonconstructive place. Thanks.

Oh, and you probably won't get another warning. Just so you know...

 

[Yora]

You can't discuss a new edition without considering the pros and cons of previous ones.

 

[Thaumaturge]

I play 4e, and I enjoy the games I play. Still, there are times it doesn't feel like D&D to me for whatever reason.

I am happy to see that 'feel like D&D' is a specifically mentioned goal this time around. Of course the math should work. Of course there are multiple editions and, therefore, there is lots of space to play in the 'feels like D&D' area. That's great. I think the modular design they are embracing will allow them to hit each edition's feeling in various ways. That's awesome.

I'm mostly happy that this time around they know how the game feels is an issue for their player base. They know it's an issue for the grognards as much as it is for the 4e players. Hopefully, people in all of their entrenched positions can see how we all want the next version of D&D to feel like our version. This post gives me hope that the designers know that, too. For all of us.

Whether they can hit that target is another conversation entirely. I'm just glad they are even aware the target exists.

Thaumaturge.