I'm being a bit silly with this post but I think it deserves to be said:
5E does not need to be 4E, 3E, 2E, or 1E. Mearls's stated design goal was to be a game for all people and that, by definition means that it's none of these things on their own.
I also think that Mr. Cook's departure doesn't affect the stated design goal. Play-test will be underway in a short time and we've been told that the game will have modules to allow DMs to build the edition they want. By virtues alone this means that game balance will be affected depending on your choices so if you like the balance point of 4e then you can create that; if you like a more wide open game you can do that too (3e) or a much simpler game (1e).
Those should be the merits the new system is judged against, not people concerns. My opinion is that most of the conversation we're having in this thread is slightly unfounded based on the facts we have of the system to date and I'll be glad to post a "company sucks" post when I've got enough to go on, if appropriate.
5E does not need to be 4E, 3E, 2E, or 1E. Mearls's stated design goal was to be a game for all people and that, by definition means that it's none of these things on their own.
I also think that Mr. Cook's departure doesn't affect the stated design goal. Play-test will be underway in a short time and we've been told that the game will have modules to allow DMs to build the edition they want. By virtues alone this means that game balance will be affected depending on your choices so if you like the balance point of 4e then you can create that; if you like a more wide open game you can do that too (3e) or a much simpler game (1e).
Those should be the merits the new system is judged against, not people concerns. My opinion is that most of the conversation we're having in this thread is slightly unfounded based on the facts we have of the system to date and I'll be glad to post a "company sucks" post when I've got enough to go on, if appropriate.