D&D 5E (2024) DnD 5e designer [Mike Mearls] explains how INDIE RPGs are taking over

[GrimCo]

The difference is that you were insinuating it isn't an RPG.

Nope. It's rpg. But i'm talking from pure design perspective. Unlike other editions, current one included, 4e was very straight forward about what it was and what play style was intended and supported by game mechanics.

 

[Piperken]

I wonder what the uptake is for new, different games. that is, I wonder how many people try a different game and decide to switch to it, versus going back to their old stand by (D&D or otherwise).

Like, if I wasn't specifically teaching D&D (by request) to my new group of millenial players, I would have introduced them to RPGs via Daggerheart for sure.

Doesn't answer your question in any proper, science-y way, but starts to look at this in the EU area.

Seems to follow the $$$ publishing levels thread.

Of note, there must be enough interest to warrant creating the Library they mention; I think that's pretty cool!

 

[zakael19]

What 4e did and many of its “indie” successor games followed was build a really distinct and clear-mechanical language challenge mode, with a distinct break from the exploration/interaction mode. What it further did was add scaffolding for bridging those modes together & giving players a way to provide their own direction on play. The DMG2 gave concrete guidance and techniques to do narrative forward play in this system that never really made it into the WOTC products apart from the excellent Neverwinter Campaign Setting which remains a master- class of PC centric campaign design. Everything that many later games brought in (ranging from Dungeon World’s techniques up to Daggerheart’s GM guidance and collaborative worldbuilding framework) shows up in 4e first.

We see this sort of thing echoed in Lancer’s eventual narrative mode; ICON’s first drafts with the FITD and tactical rulesets existing uneasily; Trespasser’s OSR spin; and Draw Steel’s loose skill system and narrative abilities contrasted to its highly defined combat.

I still think 4e’s Skill Challenge and Quest framework is the most flexible way to have the table develop goal-forward and non-GM fiat play I’ve seen out of the category.

 

[pemerton]

And it's pretty much same thing i said

Huh? This is what you said:

At it's heart, it's mmo style tactical skirmish game.

And this is what @Campbell said:

I tend to view 4eC as a visceral game about violently capable individuals who set out willingly or not to irrevocably enact change in their worlds who end up becoming mythic figures in their own right. This is highly reinforced in the assumed setting of the game with the backdrop of the Dawn War, tales of the fall of civilizations, and highly active Gods, Demon Princes, Primordials, etc. 4eC presents a world on fire in desperate need of heroes. Thematically it strikes the same currents that Greek Myth, the Diablo games, and Exalted does though tied to a more mortal perspective.

Of course to really embrace these aspects players need to be able to shift between awareness of the game's narrative to engaging its combat encounter mini-game while remaining focused on the underlying fiction.

They're not "pretty much the same thing". They're very different things.

 

[GrimCo]

To me, the "conflict in statements" is just a matter of personal value.

We both agree that game abandoned "generalist" design to master a specific lane: a robust, tactical system where the rules actually do what they say on the tin. He uses that rock-solid framework to ground a high-stakes narrative, while I appreciates it for the systemic elegance of the tactical game itself.

 

[soviet]

To me, the "conflict in statements" is just a matter of personal value.

We both agree that game abandoned "generalist" design to master a specific lane: a robust, tactical system where the rules actually do what they say on the tin. He uses that rock-solid framework to ground a high-stakes narrative, while I appreciates it for the systemic elegance of the tactical game itself.

When has D&D ever had a 'generalist' design? I would say never.

At a minimum, the D&D you describe here ('a robust, tactical system where the rules actually do what they say on the tin') is exactly the D&D found in 3e and 5e. 4e just did it better.

 

[MichaelSomething]

When has D&D ever had a 'generalist' design? I would say never.

At a minimum, the D&D you describe here ('a robust, tactical system where the rules actually do what they say on the tin') is exactly the D&D found in 3e and 5e. 4e just did it better.

But did 4E have a Commoner class?

 

[Zardnaar]

The difference is that you were insinuating it isn't an RPG.

Its an rpg but die to combat length it resulted in less everything else per session. 2 or 3 combats coukd consime the majority of a session.

My primary campaign last session 2 combats lasted just over an hour. The other 2.5-3 were exploration and RP.

In effect its meant you would also level up slower and more sessions to get the same amount of RP.

So if you didn’t like the playstyle and real life time constraints......

4E also landed with 3.5 hitting its peak in adventures and peak Paizo quality early PF.

My campaigns are really 20-30 sessions maybe. Thats more than most apparently. We didnt make it past lvl 7 in 4E.

 

[Holger Mets]

Doesn't answer your question in any proper, science-y way, but starts to look at this in the EU area.

Seems to follow the $$$ publishing levels thread.

Of note, there must be enough interest to warrant creating the Library they mention; I think that's pretty cool!

Hey there, Holger from Groupfinder here.

Just to clarify - while we are from Europe, the platform is global. Even more global than most "World Tours". The US playerbase makes up only 60% of the total playerbase on Groupfinder. So the numbers in the article do not represent EU-specific player preferences, but every users' on the platform.
The Library will be created with two goals in mind - one, to provide a list of resources that would make players' gaming experience easier/better/more varied.
And secondly - to promote and raise awareness of non-D&D systems. While D&D is a great entryway, we are hoping, that with some additional exposure to alternative systems, users will discover other systems that might better align with their interests or preferences. Or stick to D&D, if that is their jam, no judgement.

 

[Saracenus]

I want to clarify something, if your only metric for the success of a game is $$$, then 4e was a failure for WotC.

I am a trained accounting professional (not a CPA) and one of the most mind bending parts of my education was trying to quantify the unquantifiable. To that end 4e had many non-tangible effects:

For me, running weekly 4e games and building a community around D&D Encounters was a joy. It far outweighed the pain of the raging edition wars that engulfed the internet and sometimes in my local store. It brought joy folks that neither cared about editions or what the very small and vocal online community had to say. Those players and DMs were there to play and enjoy D&D, and they did. Fun is one of those intangibles.

When WotC pulled the plug on 4e and started the D&D Next public playtest those same gamers mostly made the transition. So did some of the concepts that were pioneered in 4e. Heck, even 5.5e took it a step further and brought back the bloodied condition that had failed during the D&D Next play test. Lessons were learned internally from it, that is also hard to quantify.

4e influenced other TTRPGs in response to its existence as a response to it or one against it. As stated up thread there are indy games mechanics that trace their linage to 4e. The external benefits are also hard to measure.

We can debate all day on whether or not we like 4e or not (which a subjective war of words that cannot be won). One thing is undeniable, 4e is a valuable legacy to both D&D and the hobby as a whole.

Swinging this back to what Mike was talking about in the video, there is a symbiotic relationship between D&D and the rest of the TTRPG ecosystem. Remove or diminish one or the other the whole TTRPG space suffers.

To take that ecological paradigm a little farther, think of the OGL crisis a few years back to a raging forest fire. In the aftermath when the flames went out, the TTRPG forest was scared but like all ecological traumas it spurred new growth and new biomes which did not exist before. The forest is recovering and is healthier for it.

So, we indeed all won. D&D 5e is trucking along and there are all kinds of interesting TTRPGs out there trucking along right beside it.

Peace