Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
EN World Interview With Mike Mearls, Lead Designer of D&D Next
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 5917565" data-attributes="member: 10479"><p>Flexibility doesn't automatically require system mastery. I think you are giving up on a solution based on fear of one possible outcome that stems from poor implementation.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Rejecting the terminology while agreeing with the definition of the terminology seems like an argument in semantics. Keying on the word "lowest" (as somehow meant to be a prioritization) in the concept of Lowest Common Denominator while acknowledging that it is a "common" factor, then rejecting the idea that the game can accept that something is common but can evolve to focus on some of the less common elements seems like accepting short shrift right out of the gate. Again, it's not enough at this stage for the industry leader to simply put out another decent combat system with some tacked on ways to handle the roleplaying aspects of the game. It's been done repeatedly by the owners of the D&D brand and it only gets them so far. To evolve further there needs to be integration of roleplaying through all elements of the game otherwise it isn't going to be anything we really haven't seen before. No one is arguing that combat is a fairly common element. What is being argued is if focusing yet again on that common element can yield anything fresh or yield better results than the previous times they have focused on combat in their roleplaying game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mark CMG, post: 5917565, member: 10479"] Flexibility doesn't automatically require system mastery. I think you are giving up on a solution based on fear of one possible outcome that stems from poor implementation. Rejecting the terminology while agreeing with the definition of the terminology seems like an argument in semantics. Keying on the word "lowest" (as somehow meant to be a prioritization) in the concept of Lowest Common Denominator while acknowledging that it is a "common" factor, then rejecting the idea that the game can accept that something is common but can evolve to focus on some of the less common elements seems like accepting short shrift right out of the gate. Again, it's not enough at this stage for the industry leader to simply put out another decent combat system with some tacked on ways to handle the roleplaying aspects of the game. It's been done repeatedly by the owners of the D&D brand and it only gets them so far. To evolve further there needs to be integration of roleplaying through all elements of the game otherwise it isn't going to be anything we really haven't seen before. No one is arguing that combat is a fairly common element. What is being argued is if focusing yet again on that common element can yield anything fresh or yield better results than the previous times they have focused on combat in their roleplaying game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
EN World Interview With Mike Mearls, Lead Designer of D&D Next
Top