Minimalist D&D

[Scribble]

Setting aside all the arguing on the proper use of ability scores, the other discussion is: where is Mearls going with this? Iddle mussings, or is this some kind of soft preview, and if so, of what?

Personally I think it's less of a preview of a new product, and more of a way to get everyone back on the same page.

By getting to the heart of what we all agree D&D is at the core, he can (hopefully) start getting us talking about differences, and how to get to those differences without it becoming a war of what is the "One True Way."

 

[TerraDave]

5E, for many reasons, does not really make sense.

But, as I say in the other thread, the WotCies have been very tight lipped about things, and this is relatively high profile column.

I don't want to "call it", I really don't know, but I don't think it is just sharing his thoughts.

 

[Alnag]

One of his recent articles talked about a solid core with modular add ones.

I must say, I am a little bit scared about the implication of things Mearls is talking about (not only in this article but in the previous ones as well). The "scaleble system" sound great at first. You can make your game "your own". But on the other hand, there will be less shared experience with other groups (e.g. much less to talk about on ENWorld), much more trouble to create content for such game (such as adventure etc.) Also we might end with one basic box plus buy you add-ons (the book or rather box of skills, of combat etc.)

I am aware that this might be misreading Mearls or simply seeing problems where there are none, but still. I do not like this add-on idea much. System should be one solid thing and no exceptions.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Personally I think it's less of a preview of a new product, and more of a way to get everyone back on the same page.

By getting to the heart of what we all agree D&D is at the core, he can (hopefully) start getting us talking about differences, and how to get to those differences without it becoming a war of what is the "One True Way."

Yeah, I understand what you mean. At least it gets everyone talking on the same page.

 

[Vaeron]

5E, for many reasons, does not really make sense.

But, as I say in the other thread, the WotCies have been very tight lipped about things, and this is relatively high profile column.

I don't want to "call it", I really don't know, but I don't think it is just sharing his thoughts.

Yeah, 3.0 only lasted 3 years before they replaced it with 3.5... So I imagine anything is on the table.

 

[Kelvor Ravenstar]

Yeah, 3.0 only lasted 3 years before they replaced it with 3.5... So I imagine anything is on the table.

I'd hope not, but with Slavicsek's departure we might get a policy change. The uproar over 3.5 led them to say 'we won't do a 4.5', and I'm of the opinion that Essentials isn't really. The only big change that Essentials brought about that would really change people's existing games is the removal of melee basic options for many classes with the Melee Training change.
Considering the amount of vitriol still on message boards about Essentials I think it would be the height of stupidity for "anything" to be on the table at this time.

 

[catastrophic]

Well, they did gamma world, maybe they'll just spin out a minimalist dungeon crawly game, or even a generic, multi-setting-ready game, and see how it goes? After all, 4e was preceeded not only by the bot9s, but the saga edition of the starwars rpg.

They could o one book to test the waters, possibly going so far as to hit another genre to keep it completly seperate from the edition war talking points.

 

[Balesir]

I would love to see a separate, parallel game that caters to an audience who like simpler, faster, more "setting-based" games - I think it would be an excellent idea.

What worries me is that it will be mixed up with the existing D&D game and compromise and muddle it beyond usefulness (for me and others who like what it currently does).

 

[Scribble]

Yeah man- I would love to see a parallel gamma world style simpler game.

 

[Robtheman]

let us consider market share

The big benefit of talking Modular is that D&D can be expanded in to far more products. Modular design grants some of the flexibility required to add and remove chunks of rules where necessary depending on the physics and cultures of the gaming world(s) in question.

Perhaps this is Mearls way of floating the concept to his team, his consumer audience and his bosses in a relatively safe environment. We can be certain it started conversations in his office and here in the forum/blog world of nerd gamers. Any guesses if his bosses took a moment to read this? I am guessing they do not have expert level knowledge of a broad array of table top RPGs - at least at the president and VP level in Hasbro.

- Rob