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
*TTRPGs General
Mike Mearls: A Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard With Arcane Tradition Walk Into A Tavern
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="Iosue" data-source="post: 7648943" data-attributes="member: 6680772"><p>I by no means want it to sound like I'm saying the designers just threw a mechanic in there and then players such as yourself worked it into something useful that fits your playstyle. I have no doubt they were influenced by indie games -- I think one of 4e's strengths is that it drew on a lot of influences. Certainly if you want a mechanic for non-combat interaction, indie games are the place to look.</p><p> </p><p>What I'm saying is more like this: one statement I've seen over and over again since the 5e announcement is "WotC doesn't even understand their own game." I could understand this if there'd been complete turnover since 4e came out, or if we were talking about Monte Cook, but Mearls was part of the development team from the beginning, Wyatt's still there, Jeremy Crawford was part of the 4e design process, Schwalb and Thompson have 4e bona fides. I think they understand 4e fine, and I think in many ways it does what they wanted it to do (although there seem to have been issues in presenting that). But part of the process is that the players get a hold of the game, and they take it to places, or perhaps extremes, that the designers didn't expect.</p><p> </p><p>So, in the case of scene-framing and fiction-first mechanics, I absolutely believe that they designed it to be friendly to those kinds of playstyles. I don't believe, however, that they intended that to be the kind of play 4e was <em>best</em> at. But it's as Heinsoo said in your link; D&D is broadbased, while indie games have laser focus. I think in particular with Skill Challenges they intended a much broader application across playstyles. I think this is apparent from the examples they included in the books, the examples they've included in published adventures, and the kind of Skill Challenges Chris Perkins has used in his celebrity games. Folks such as yourself have taken the broad-based raw material, and with some tweaking and focused application have turned it into a focused, awesome tool for your play. I think that falls within the broad purview of the designer's intent to give DMs a variety of tools in adventure design and play. But I don't think it means that the designers don't understand the game. If one group of players finds Skill Challenges totally awesome for how they play, but other groups find them problematic, I think it's fair for the designers to say Skill Challenges weren't working as intended. (Hence, the multiple tries at it.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Iosue, post: 7648943, member: 6680772"] I by no means want it to sound like I'm saying the designers just threw a mechanic in there and then players such as yourself worked it into something useful that fits your playstyle. I have no doubt they were influenced by indie games -- I think one of 4e's strengths is that it drew on a lot of influences. Certainly if you want a mechanic for non-combat interaction, indie games are the place to look. What I'm saying is more like this: one statement I've seen over and over again since the 5e announcement is "WotC doesn't even understand their own game." I could understand this if there'd been complete turnover since 4e came out, or if we were talking about Monte Cook, but Mearls was part of the development team from the beginning, Wyatt's still there, Jeremy Crawford was part of the 4e design process, Schwalb and Thompson have 4e bona fides. I think they understand 4e fine, and I think in many ways it does what they wanted it to do (although there seem to have been issues in presenting that). But part of the process is that the players get a hold of the game, and they take it to places, or perhaps extremes, that the designers didn't expect. So, in the case of scene-framing and fiction-first mechanics, I absolutely believe that they designed it to be friendly to those kinds of playstyles. I don't believe, however, that they intended that to be the kind of play 4e was [i]best[/i] at. But it's as Heinsoo said in your link; D&D is broadbased, while indie games have laser focus. I think in particular with Skill Challenges they intended a much broader application across playstyles. I think this is apparent from the examples they included in the books, the examples they've included in published adventures, and the kind of Skill Challenges Chris Perkins has used in his celebrity games. Folks such as yourself have taken the broad-based raw material, and with some tweaking and focused application have turned it into a focused, awesome tool for your play. I think that falls within the broad purview of the designer's intent to give DMs a variety of tools in adventure design and play. But I don't think it means that the designers don't understand the game. If one group of players finds Skill Challenges totally awesome for how they play, but other groups find them problematic, I think it's fair for the designers to say Skill Challenges weren't working as intended. (Hence, the multiple tries at it.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Mike Mearls: A Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard With Arcane Tradition Walk Into A Tavern
Top