Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6177682" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>Mearls statement there made me twitch badly.  Not because it's not true (my fundamental criterion for Next is that it must work at what it does and I don't much care what it does).  But because Mike Mearls himself is, from what I have seen, an edition warrior.  Anyone who makes jokes about Warlords shouting hands back on to run down a playstyle is (especially when Cure Light Wounds doesn't put hands back on). People like what works for them.  4e and 3.X work in different ways - and in order to learn 4e you needed to throw out the 3e form book and go back to square 2 or 3.  Which meant that out of the box it really didn't work that well.  Add in that 4e's opening module was Mike Mearls' utterly terrible Keep on the Shadowfell (a poor adventure in its own right and almost the worst possible fit with 4e) and the game did not work for them.From what I can tell, Mike Mearls has finally gone for the Unisystem design method.  Make the game simple enough and familiar enough to get the hell out of the way while the game goes on - but in this case while sticking to D&D tropes that are familiar enough that people who are used to them will find they get the hell out of the way.  Which isn't a bad way to do things.I've never had this problem.  All I've done was picture the monster in my mind, visualise what it does, and write that up as a power or two.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification