WotC Mike Mearls: "D&D Is Uncool Again"

Monster_Manual_Traditional_Cover_Art_copy.webp


In Mike Mearls' recent interview with Ben Riggs, he talks about how he feels that Dungeons & Dragons has had its moment, and is now uncool again. Mearls was one of the lead designers of D&D 5E and became the franchise's Creative Director in 2018. He worked at WotC until he was laid off in 2023. He is now EP of roleplaying games at Chaosium, the publisher of Call of Chulhu.

My theory is that when you look back at the OGL, the real impact of it is that it made D&D uncool again. D&D was cool, right? You had Joe Manganiello and people like that openly talking about playing D&D. D&D was something that was interesting, creative, fun, and different. And I think what the OGL did was take that concept—that Wizards and this idea of creativity that is inherent in the D&D brand because it's a roleplaying game, and I think those two things were sundered. And I don’t know if you can ever put them back together.

I think, essentially, it’s like that phrase: The Mandate of Heaven. I think fundamentally what happened was that Wizards has lost the Mandate of Heaven—and I don’t see them even trying to get it back.

What I find fascinating is that it was Charlie Hall who wrote that article. This is the same Charlie Hall who wrote glowing reviews of the 5.5 rulebooks. And then, at the same time, he’s now writing, "This is your chance because D&D seems to be stumbling." How do you square that? How do I go out and say, "Here are the two new Star Wars movies. They’re the best, the most amazing, the greatest Star Wars movies ever made. By the way, Star Wars has never been weaker. Now is the time for other sci-fi properties", like, to me that doesn’t make any sense! To me, it’s a context thing again.

Maybe this is the best Player’s Handbook ever written—but the vibes, the audience, the people playing these games—they don’t seem excited about it. We’re not seeing a groundswell of support and excitement. Where are the third-party products? That’s what I'd ask. Because that's what you’d think, "oh, there’s a gap", I mean remember before the OGL even came up, back when 3.0 launched, White Wolf had a monster book. There were multiple adventures at Gen Con. The license wasn’t even official yet, and there were already adventures showing up in stores. We're not seeing that, what’s ostensibly the new standard going forward? If anything, we’re seeing the opposite—creators are running in the opposite direction. I mean, that’s where I’m going.

And hey—to plug my Patreon—patreon.com/mikemearls (one word). This time last year, when I was looking at my post-Wizards options, I thought, "Well, maybe I could start doing 5E-compatible stuff." And now what I’m finding is…I just don’t want to. Like—it just seems boring. It’s like trying to start a hair metal band in 1992. Like—No, no, no. Everyone’s mopey and we're wearing flannel. It's Seattle and rain. It’s Nirvana now, man. It’s not like Poison. And that’s the vibe I get right now, yeah, Poison was still releasing albums in the ’90s. They were still selling hundreds of thousands or a million copies. But they didn’t have any of the energy. It's moved on. But what’s interesting to me is that roleplaying game culture is still there. And that’s what I find fascinating about gaming in general—especially TTRPGs. I don’t think we’ve ever had a period where TTRPGs were flourishing, and had a lot of energy and excitement around them, and D&D wasn’t on the upswing. Because I do think that’s what’s happening now. We’re in very strange waters where I think D&D is now uncool.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Sure. Depending on the tone, that usually turns me off also. It's not limited to Mearls for me.
See to me, the content they discuss and release is far more important than how they feel about other games and how they choose to express those feelings. If they make something that sounds interesting, and I can afford it, I might buy it. That practically my only consideration.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Why would you need to take current employees views on things at all? One needn't listen to any of them (current or former) if one doesn't want to. So there's no need to take either one "more seriously" than the other. They are just people talking... and one hears what they say and then goes on with their day.
I like to know the internal workings of things in which I am interested, and I believe a clearer view of such is more likely from those who are no longer legally bound to the company.
 

But it's not like most of us are ever going to meet the man, let alone play the game with him...

I have met him, and played a session he ran of, iirc, Dying Earth, at a house con many years back now.

He was personable enough. The game was entertaining and he ran it competently. It wasn't life-changing or anything, though. There was nothing magical about his approach to play.
 

I was fortunate to once meet a comic writer who wrote a fair amount for a comic line or two I had followed. I had a 15-20 minute sit down with him which was great. I got to ask him questions I had about this or that storyline, why they took a certain direction, left out that character, which storylines were their favourites, why they moved on... etc.
I'd imagine it is the same with RPG designers. We're curious to see what ideas people have and why. Perhaps it is something we never thought of, maybe we are seeing how aligned our ideas are...etc
 
Last edited:

It's also possible that Mearls legitimately feels the way he posted, and was thus expressing himself.

The point still applies - the phrase was coined by one of our original moderators, not about game designers, but about people talking about games here.

It is better (more constructive, instructive, interesting, and thought-provoking) to build up the game you love, and actually want to play, than to use it as a platform to tear other games down.

You don't like a game? Fine. Stop turning back to take potshots at it! Move forward to something you like, and stop framing your love for it in terms of the game you don't like!
 

The point still applies - the phrase was coined by one of our original moderators, not about game designers, but about people talking about games here.

It is better (more constructive, instructive, interesting, and thought-provoking) to build up the game you love, and actually want to play, than to use it as a platform to tear other games down.

You don't like a game? Fine. Stop turning back to take potshots at it! Move forward to something you like, and stop framing your love for it in terms of the game you don't like!
I understand that this feels better to read, but to me it sounds like a request to refrain from expressing yourself if you're unhappy about something. That can be a tall order, particularly if social pressure to conform to a prevailing opinion is high.
 

I understand that this feels better to read, but to me it sounds like a request to refrain from expressing yourself if you're unhappy about something. That can be a tall order, particularly if social pressure to conform to a prevailing opinion is high.
It depends if your goal is to convince others or if you're just venting your spleen.
 




Remove ads

Remove ads

Top