D&D 4E Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023

[Undrave]

A lot of folks care about the HOW. I see no reason Mearls shouldn't have said what he said, provided he believed it. Nothing wrong with expressing his opinion.

I'm talking about this bit:

...he said, admitting that in trying to please gamers with a limited imagination, 4th edition might have punished those with an active one.

This drips of elitism, and of how ‘superior’ the ‘theatre of the mind’ (AUGH) is. Ignoring that 4e has a solid frame work for improvised actions, a solid framework for improvising new monsters or modifying exiting ones on the fly, and fully embraces changing the fluff of everything you want! How is that punishing imagination?!

 

[Alzrius]

This drips of elitism, and of how ‘superior’ the ‘theatre of the mind’ (AUGH) is.

I thought it was with regard to simulationism, i.e. the "how" that represents the internal consistency of the game world, rather than TotM.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm talking about this bit:



This drips of elitism, and of how ‘superior’ the ‘theatre of the mind’ (AUGH) is. Ignoring that 4e has a solid frame work for improvised actions, a solid framework for improvising new monsters or modifying exiting ones on the fly, and fully embraces changing the fluff of everything you want! How is that punishing imagination?!

I don't really agree with it either, but I don't deny his right to say what he feels.

 

[Red Castle]

I'm talking about this bit:



This drips of elitism, and of how ‘superior’ the ‘theatre of the mind’ (AUGH) is. Ignoring that 4e has a solid frame work for improvised actions, a solid framework for improvising new monsters or modifying exiting ones on the fly, and fully embraces changing the fluff of everything you want! How is that punishing imagination?!

I would be curious to know what he really said because that is the only part that is not a quote, so it could be the author interpretation.

But regardless, I fail to see how 4e punish players with creativity… I’ve been playing and dming since the early 90s and never felt that 4e was limiting my creativity, on the contrary, I always saw it as a giant toolbox where I could do whatever I want.

Oh, and reading the article, it looks to me like the first paragraph of the quote is about 3rd edition, not 4th. The idea was that 2nd edition was all about the DM, 3rd all about the players, and 4th tried to balanced things out.

 

[Pedantic]

Oh, and reading the article, it looks to me like the first paragraph of the quote is about 3rd edition, not 4th. The idea was that 2nd edition was all about the DM, 3rd all about the players, and 4th tried to balanced things out.

I think it's probably best read as 3e-4e inclusive? It suggests both are part of the same trend he's discussing. Based on the conclusion and the article's publishing date, this feels like Mearls pushing for Essentials and/or laying the groundwork for 5e.

 

[pemerton]

On Mike Mearls:

Here you can read Mearls's famous (notorious?) 1999 review of B2 Keep on the Borderlands: Review of B2: The Keep on the Borderlands - RPGnet RPG Game Index

Some choice quotes:

*If you paid for it, you got ripped off

*The Keep on the Borderlands (KotB) literally serves as exhibit A in the great case against Dungeons and Dragons.

*The Keep on the Borderlands was written after the Village of Hommlett, after the D series. Those modules weren't masterpieces, but they sure as heck had far more depth and coherence than this disaster of a gaming product.

*How many people picked up the D&D basic set, fiddled with it for a bit, and then dropped it altogether because they didn't know anything better then the Keep was out there?​

Had he changed his mind by 2012, when the Caves of Chaos was used as a 5e playtest adventure? Or was he just doing his job, which would include not slandering the products made by the company he works for?

I don't know. And I'm not really sure that it matters.

 

[Nikosandros]

On Mike Mearls:

Here you can read Mearls's famous (notorious?) 1999 review of B2 Keep on the Borderlands: Review of B2: The Keep on the Borderlands - RPGnet RPG Game Index

Some choice quotes:

*If you paid for it, you got ripped off​

​

*The Keep on the Borderlands (KotB) literally serves as exhibit A in the great case against Dungeons and Dragons.​

​

*The Keep on the Borderlands was written after the Village of Hommlett, after the D series. Those modules weren't masterpieces, but they sure as heck had far more depth and coherence than this disaster of a gaming product.​

​

*How many people picked up the D&D basic set, fiddled with it for a bit, and then dropped it altogether because they didn't know anything better then the Keep was out there?​

Had he changed his mind by 2012, when the Caves of Chaos was used as a 5e playtest adventure? Or was he just doing his job, which would include not slandering the products made by the company he works for?

I don't know. And I'm not really sure that it matters.

I remember this terrible review. Did Mearls sort of retract it at some point? I have a vague memory, but I'm not so sure...

 

[darjr]

On Mike Mearls:

Here you can read Mearls's famous (notorious?) 1999 review of B2 Keep on the Borderlands: Review of B2: The Keep on the Borderlands - RPGnet RPG Game Index

Some choice quotes:

*If you paid for it, you got ripped off​

​

*The Keep on the Borderlands (KotB) literally serves as exhibit A in the great case against Dungeons and Dragons.​

​

*The Keep on the Borderlands was written after the Village of Hommlett, after the D series. Those modules weren't masterpieces, but they sure as heck had far more depth and coherence than this disaster of a gaming product.​

​

*How many people picked up the D&D basic set, fiddled with it for a bit, and then dropped it altogether because they didn't know anything better then the Keep was out there?​

Had he changed his mind by 2012, when the Caves of Chaos was used as a 5e playtest adventure? Or was he just doing his job, which would include not slandering the products made by the company he works for?

I don't know. And I'm not really sure that it matters.

I really don’t like these attempts to discredit people. I mean “slander”?

As to the rest of your post.
He has talked about his going back to playing older D&D games with the team and coming to new insights in an attempt to understand.

My original article is also about learning new things too and coming to new insights.

I would have hoped you at least mentioned that.

 

[pemerton]

I remember this terrible review. Did Mearls sort of retract it at some point? I have a vague memory, but I'm not so sure...

I have a memory of him reflecting on it at least. I Googled to try and find that, but couldn't - but found this instead: Mike Mearls Still Doesn’t Get It – Roleplaying Games & Fantasy

Which suggests that even two decades on Mearls's relationship to KotB remains an ambivalent one.

Mearls is the only WotC person I've ever seen talk about Kickers (ie player-authored inciting events that serve as a focus of the action) as a technique in RPGing; but on the other hand his discussion of them didn't really suggest he was implementing them in a full-blooded sense.

Ultimately, I look to RPGing advice from designers who strike me as insightful and whose advice has proved helpful in play. For me that is especially Luke Crane, Ron Edwards, Vincent Baker and Robin Laws. I'm sure Mearls has done some good design work, and I must have used some of his stuff playing 4e, but I don't recall ever reading advice from him that I felt made a difference to my game.

 

[pemerton]

I really don’t like these attempts to discredit people.

Why am I discrediting him? The review is a matter of public record, and well known. It's consistent with what you posted not far upthread, about his connections to The Gaming Outpost and then The Forge.

I'm pointing out that Mearls's views on RPGing are not easily siloed.

I mean “slander”?

You don't think that review is a brutal one?

My original article is also about learning new things too and coming to new insights.

I would have hoped you at least mentioned that.

What article are you referring to?