D&DN - Monte's Lejendary Adventures... (?)

[mkill]

Think about it... An accomplished game designer, who played an important role in D&D history. He hates the current incarnation of the game (although he is too polite to say so openly). He now has the chance to make it right, to create a game that will surely show everyone the error of their ways.

Of course, Lejendary Adventures set out to be completely different from D&D, while the promise of D&DN is that it's like every edition of D&D ever (except the one that shall not be named).

I'm not even saying that LA was a bad game - I don't know, I once had the box in my hands but it didn't scream "buy me" enough so I left it at the store. Maybe it has some fans in an obscure corner of the Web. It probably would have been fairly successful if it hadn't set out to reinvent gaming by renaming absolutely everything, including "PC", "elf", "class" and "damage" (??).

If there is one lesson in here, don't ever let any agenda take the top spot in your priority list past "create an accessible game that is fun to play".

And now give us that damn playtest file, it's mid March already.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

I'm not even saying that LA was a bad game - I don't know, I once had the box in my hands but it didn't scream "buy me" enough so I left it at the store. Maybe it has some fans in an obscure corner of the Web. It probably would have been fairly successful if it hadn't set out to reinvent gaming by renaming absolutely everything, including "PC", "elf", "class" and "damage" (??).

Same here.

I don't know if this really applies to Monte or not, but it is an interesting idea.

 

[trancejeremy]

I think the lawsuit over Mythus probably went a long way towards the design of Legendary Adventures.

Not that it was very D&D-ish (in anything, more like Rolemaster, ironically enough since that's what Monte Cook seemed to want to make D&D 3e).

But it's probably an extreme example.

 

[mcintma]

...He hates the current incarnation of the game (although he is too polite to say so openly). He now has the chance to make it right, to create a game that will surely show everyone the error of their ways.

Of course, <4e> set out to be completely different from D&D ...

What you wrote was chillingly similar to what I feel Mike Mearls set out to do with 4e ...

 

[am181d]

Think about it... An accomplished game designer, who played an important role in D&D history. He hates the current incarnation of the game (although he is too polite to say so openly). He now has the chance to make it right, to create a game that will surely show everyone the error of their ways.

I don't think that's an accurate description of Cook *or* Gygax's motivations. Gygax was striking out to create something on his own -- something largely different from what came before. Cook is following up an innovative edition (4e) with an edition intended to be closer to what went before.

When I first read the thread title, I thought maybe you were talking about Arcana Evolved!

 

[mkill]

What you wrote was chillingly similar to what I feel Mike Mearls set out to do with 4e ...

Mike Mearls was not the 4E lead designer.

But yeah, 4E had some of that change for change's sake too.
Was it really necessary to change the magic item slots?
Was it really necessary to remove the Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil alignments?
Did they have to remove Gnomes from the PHB (and then make fun of them)?
Did they have to abolish the schools of magic?
Did they have to set the FR on fire?

Probably not, and 4E would have been a lot less controversial if it had been more conservative.

However, the changes in 4E were more an expression of a new design team bringing fresh ideas in. Nobody on the 4E team had the same weight of credentials that Monte Cook or Gary Gygax had. Jonathan Tweet, especially, is better known for his work outside of D&D.

Also, I think the basic idea of 4E was to change D&D towards a different concept, not away from its current form.

 

[Gadget]

What you wrote was chillingly similar to what I feel Mike Mearls set out to do with 4e ...

This message seems to assume that Mearls was the "Main Guy" behind 4e, which, as I understand things, is simply not true. While Mearls was working at WOTC leading up to the release of 4e, he was by no means the lead designer/developer of the system and they began work on it before he was even hired, IIRC. He did not even move into a lead developer/designer role until well after the release, let alone head of R&D.

Now, he may have been the main instigator behind the Essentials line, that was about when he moved into the lead design/developer role, but I do not think 4E as a whole was "his baby", so to speak.

 

[mcintma]

I stand corrected guys, I thought Mr Mearls was the top brain behind 4e ...

 

[amerigoV]

Did they have to remove Gnomes from the PHB (and then make fun of them)?

Yes. And they should do so at every opportunity.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Did they have to set the FR on fire?

I dunno, if it's such a hot property, shouldn't it self-combust? (If not, then yes!)