D&D 5E Dungeoncraft Interview with Mike Mearls

WoW (especially during the Classic era) had a lot of mechanics that felt like old-school D&D, things like some spells needing reagents and training being a costly thing and stuff like Paladins and Druids getting their unique skills like Wild Shapes and Summon Steeds through challenging questlines. But we have to be clear that those D&D-isms were very quickly sanded down over the next few expansions, and the gameplay became a lot more streamlined.
D&D itself has sanded down a lot of these in modern editions, for good or ill.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

On the campaigns ending at 7th level thing: 5e should clearly just go to level 10, with some of the good ideas currently in the 11-20 range being rewritten for the 7-10 level range. It's a huge waste of space detailing all the 6-9th level spells that people never use, that could be in an optional book that has the space to more clearly support high level play. Cool high level monster ideas could have rebalanced versions for 9th-10th level characters to fight. But there is a small minority of people who do play high level who don't want to buy a second phb for that material, I suppose.
I still think higher level spells for all classes should be hard to find, hard to research, expensive rituals.
 



No statistics.

But there would not be so much talk about it if it were just 5%.



Space saving.

Unless you go full MINIs, Keywords, or 4e layouts, writing out the full abilities of interesting high level monster will take a lot of page space

AKA fewer monsters.

Will the community okay the sacrifice?


Well the Archmage is calculated around having time stop.

Without 9th level spells, you are looking at a whole reorganizing of spell choice or like I said before ..bigger stats blocks and fewer monsters
I'd be fine with that. We all have plenty of monsters.
 

It's probably bias about higher level play. We"re not representative of anything. Most of us here have probably played high level which puts us in that 1%. 10% being generous if level 10 counts.

Few enjoy it. I can do it but it's not worth the effort B/X might be an exception and that's capped at 14 with lower power curve.
B/X had it right on that score IMO.
 


It's a bit basic for modern players though.

C&Cs interedting but lacks moving parts like say ACKs. ACKs AC system is weird.

Modern mechanics, not a clone, but still keeps things I'm used to and like.
ACKS II is my preferred system. More complex B/X with more options and a strong emphasis on sim.
 

That is exactly what I want.

Yeah I'm trying to figure out how to do it.
Ofc I want to say "DCC!" but that's not really being in good-faith. I do find DCC to be between OSE and modern DnD in terms of power, but not in options/build-complexity... at least, not with the core book. There ARE (so many) 3pp out there that expand character options, honestly it makes me wish that I'd used them when I originally tried to sell some of my players on DCC... some of them are just thirsty for "builds" and "options" that having your character develop almost entirely from emergent play like DCC does just won't do it for them.

I'm sure there's a game out there already though, that fits between that OSE and modern DnD niche... maybe Shadow of the Weird Wizard? It falls heavier on the modern DnD side, but not all the way.
 


Remove ads

Top