Mearls is the new manager of D&D

[doctorhook]

In addition, the generic monster tokens from the Game Day do have the bloodied side on the other... except for the minions, which have "Hazards" on the other side.

Cheers!

Colour me genuinely amazed. If the tokens in D&D Essentials are like this, then I'm sold.

Klaus, do you mind if I ask how successful the product you worked on was? Do you think that WotC publishing tokens is an attempt to capitalize on that product's success?

 

[MerricB]

Do you think that WotC publishing tokens is an attempt to capitalize on that product's success?

I don't think that's the case: I think it's rather that they've extended the D&D Miniatures line as far as it would go, and it's now time to look at the alternatives. Given there aren't all that many alternatives, we have tokens!

This is done within the understanding that D&D has, for the last 10 years or so, been based mostly on representing the battlefield with something. So, although Wizards during 3.5e was able to produce a good array of surprisingly affordable miniatures, the current state of the market doesn't allow that.

Cheers!

 

[doctorhook]

I don't think that's the case: I think it's rather that they've extended the D&D Miniatures line as far as it would go, and it's now time to look at the alternatives. Given there aren't all that many alternatives, we have tokens!

This is done within the understanding that D&D has, for the last 10 years or so, been based mostly on representing the battlefield with something. So, although Wizards during 3.5e was able to produce a good array of surprisingly affordable miniatures, the current state of the market doesn't allow that.

Cheers!

Good point! Not to mention that the market is saturated with WotC's minis now, to a point where they're competing against their own previous releases on the secondary market.

Attempting to tie this vaguely back to the topic at hand: What does everyone think about D&D that's less dependent upon graphical representation? Does anyone think we'll see a resurgence of that within the foreseeable future? (...Acknowledging that D&D originated as a wargame, of course.)

 

[MerricB]

What does everyone think about D&D that's less dependent upon graphical representation?

Roleplaying, exploration, puzzle and problem-solving; and they are areas that have been sadly neglected in Wizards adventures. Not to exclusion; certainly all the official modules have such sections in them, but they have somewhat wilted away under the combats and the (mostly) linear pacing.

However, supplements like Hammerfast give me hope. I want to see more adventures from Wizards; adventures that allow for more flexibility in their structure and aren't dominated by the nightmare to pacing that combats can become.

Cheers!

 

[WheresMyD20]

Attempting to tie this vaguely back to the topic at hand: What does everyone think about D&D that's less dependent upon graphical representation? Does anyone think we'll see a resurgence of that within the foreseeable future? (...Acknowledging that D&D originated as a wargame, of course.)

That's been my #1 wish for D&D for the last 10 years.

Yes, D&D originated as a wargame, but even in it's earliest days, minis were considered optional. Check page 6 of OD&D - neither minis nor counters appear in the recommended equipment list. In addition, there's this quote on the same page: "Miniature figures can be added if the players have them available and so desire, but miniature figures are not required, only esthetically pleasing; similarly, unit counters can be employed - with or without figures - although by themselves the bits of cardboard lack the eye-appeal of of the varied and brightly painted miniature figures."

I'd *love* to see minis, tokens, and grids once again made strictly optional. I think that would dramatically speed up combat and put some of the focus of the game back on exploration, puzzles, and roleplaying.

It used to be that combat was something that happened while you were exploring. Now, it feels like exploring is what happens between combats. It's a subtle, but important, difference.

 

[Lanefan]

Attempting to tie this vaguely back to the topic at hand: What does everyone think about D&D that's less dependent upon graphical representation? Does anyone think we'll see a resurgence of that within the foreseeable future? (...Acknowledging that D&D originated as a wargame, of course.)

While it'd be a fine development, it would also represent a *very* significant shift in overall design philosophy.

3e and 4e have gone much more rules-rigid than earlier editions, a natural side-effect of which is a greater requirement for - to use your term - graphical representation. To reduce or eliminate this would require a strong move toward rules-fluid, and while that would be great I suspect it is quite unlikely given current design trends.

Lan-"but we can always hope"-efan

 

[jbear]

Given the advanced stage that 4e has reached and what must be the company imposed limitations on what Mr Mearls is going to be allowed to do (I very much doubt he will be allowed to change the company's policy on OGL issues, whatever his personal views may or may not be), I am very curious as to what new wind this change brings.

What Mr Mearls posted certainly deserves applause. What better motivation can one have then a desire to inspire a deep love for the game. The 'how' given the circumstances, rifts, warts and all, is the tricky part.

Personally, I think that 4e is at a great stage. I have a clear, easy to manage solid rules set i can improvise with without barely needing to pick up a book. I have more character options and monster options than I could shake a stick at. I use adventures as the bones to build organs into and flesh and skin upon, so I haven't really felt their weakness professed on the boards.

What I am patiently waiting for is more than likely not even within Mr Mearls sphere of influence. (I'm not going to even mention the VTT because ... doh! Mentioned it)

So, I remain curious, and yet enthused that someone who is taking the reigns has such a positive and admirable veiw on what needs to be brought in to 4e. To think it might get even better, that bridges might be built to the entire gaming community, dizzying, wonderful, but we might be putting too much hope on the poor guys shoulders considering he will have to achieve his goals working within the limits of a pre established framework.

All said and done, considering what he wrote, it is good news, fullstop.

 

[BryonD]

Given the advanced stage that 4e has reached and what must be the company imposed limitations on what Mr Mearls is going to be allowed to do (I very much doubt he will be allowed to change the company's policy on OGL issues, whatever his personal views may or may not be), I am very curious as to what new wind this change brings.

Scott Rouse was very pro-OGL and was in a much better position to push for it.
Mike may have a chance to fix the game. But I agree with you about the OGL. That is not even on the table for discussion.

 

[Zaran]

Whenever I think of someone getting into a position because of the elimination of someone else I think of Empire Strikes Back. Apology accepted, Andy Collins.

 

[ggroy]

Whenever I think of someone getting into a position because of the elimination of someone else I think of Empire Strikes Back. Apology accepted, Andy Collins.

Who got Moff Tarkin's old job?