D&D 5E Dungeoncraft Interview with Mike Mearls

[THEMNGMNT]

I hope this doesn't turn into another 4E edition war thread. Don't we have enough of those already?

Regarding how many levels the game should cover? It's an interesting topic. Reasonable people can disagree.

My take? It's arbitrary. I've played 13th Age and Shadow of the Demon Lord. Both go 10 levels. They feel nothing alike. Demon Lord has a shallow power curve. 13th Age has a broad power curve.

I enjoy 5E most from 3rd level through 13th level. Curiously...that's ten levels.

What does it mean? I don't know.

I've also noticed that I still enjoy high level play when the party is small. Three PCs feel vulnerable at any level. Five PCs feel nearly invulnerable at any level.

 

[Distracted DM]

I've also noticed that I still enjoy high level play when the party is small. Three PCs feel vulnerable at any level. Five PCs feel nearly invulnerable at any level.

You know, that's a great point. I've run games up to high levels with groups that had 3, 4, 5, and 6 players at the table. The 3 player table (and the 4 player table if one person was out) really didn't seem as bad at high levels. I guess that's the force multiplier, or whatever the correct term would be for it- I definitely underestimated that.

 

[el-remmen]

I will also say that despite kinda not always being on board with the changes and ideas @mearls has been showing on his patreon (I am a supporter) for 5E and his Odyssey version (though I've basically stolen his alignment language for my home table), I would 1000% percent play in either of those games with Mearls running them - because with the right GM, the rules don't matter as much (not sure what he'd say about that, because I know it is hard to build design principles around that idea beyond "rulings not rules"). I have played in one-shot games run by Mearls twice (neither of which were D&D, both from before he worked at WoTC) and had some of the best times playing (though the other players at the table also helped).

This is weird, because I also obviously think the rules matter or else I would not kitbash and homebrew as much as I do.

 

[Charlaquin]

4e combat is tactical with heavy grid reliance (not that you cannot play TotM before anyone needs to post that).

EDIT: But this raises an interesting question as to what do we ascribe as tactical - geometrical areas of affect? turn based combat?

Tactics is small moment-to-moment decision making, in contrast with strategy, which is long-term planing. Most games have elements of both tactics and strategy, but when a game is described as “tactical” it means the game provides many opportunities to make these moment-to-moment decisions, and those decisions have a meaningful impact on your chances of victory. When a game is described as “strategic,” it means that tactics alone aren’t usually enough to win, your long-term strategy plays a bigger role in your chances of victory.

D&D has historically leaned more on strategy than tactics. The daily resource attrition model is highly strategic - you are likely to be able to win most balanced encounters pretty much regardless of your tactical decisions, but if you don’t manage your resources strategically, you will run out of them before the end of the day, and when that happens you are no longer favored to win most balanced encounters.

4e was much more heavily focused on the individual encounter, with things like encounter powers and healing surges making resource management across the day less important than resource management within each individual encounter. It also provided lots of opportunities for little decisions that could affect an encounter, like positioning, forced movement, and all the different powers each character had at their disposal.

I personally loved this shift in emphasis, but a lot of people who preferred the more strategic approach did not care for it.

 

[Distracted DM]

I will also say that despite kinda not always being on board with the changes and ideas @mearls has been showing on his patreon (I am supporter) for 5E and his Odyssey version (though I've basically stolen his alignment language for my home table), I would 1000% percent play in either of those games with Mearls running them - because with the right GM, the rules don't matter as much (not sure what he'd say about that, because I know it is hard to build design principles around that idea beyond "rulings not rules"). I have played in one-shot games run by Mearls twice (neither of which were D&D, both from before he worked at WoTC) and had some of the best times playing (though the other players at the table also helped).

This is weird, because I also obviously think the rules matter or else I would not kitbash and homebrew as much as I do.

What post was the alignment language in? Now I'm curious!
edit: Looked it up myself, probably Front End Alignments?

 

[el-remmen]

What post was the alignment language in? Now I'm curious!
edit: Looked it up myself, probably Front End Alignments?

https://www.patreon.com/posts/front-end-118166618

 

[Tigris]

Would help if you'd directed your strawman somewhere else first. Nobody says, including the interview with mearls, that 4e was full of WoW mechanics... except you, complaining about the nonexistent people who didn't say it. Don't bring baggage from some other conversation into every one that has the keyword 4e in it. What mearls said is that of course 4e was a massive influence on 4e, because management's directive was to reach out via the design of the game to people who were playing WoW instead of D&D, before everyone playing D&D was playing WoW instead.

Whether or not that was a reasonable fear or not was also part of the discussion. But no, nobody said that 4e was designed to explicitly replicate the WoW experience at the table with WoW mechanics.

Why do we at this point take anything which mearls said about original D&D 4E serious?

• He was NOT part of the original design team. He was just not there at all.
• He joined 9+ months later and NOT as a gamedesigner but as a tester/developer that was only later
• He is the most hated designer among all 4E fans. There are even theories that his job was to make 4E tank such that WotC has could make the next edition.
  • He was the person who profited most from 4E failing becoming the lead of 5E a game which he could design from the beginning
  • He was responsible for the most hated books
• He literally was not posting anything since years on these forums until now to make advertisement for his new game
• He exactly knows that stating "4E was made to be like WoW" will get huge visibility and lots of discussion because he was in other similar threads.

In an interview with the ACTUAL people behind 4E it was stated that yes 4E should make it easy for people from MMOs/WoW to join D&D but they also said that almost nothing in 4E was inspired by WoW

It is a huge difference to make it easy to join your game (by streamlining it, by not requiring old knowledge, etc.) than using inspiration from that other game.

From the interviews I watched with the key people of 4E, there where 3 things which were influenced by WoW

1. The business model of subscription
2. The fact that everyone is useful in combat (so no classes focused on the non combat parts alone)
3. Having a broad variety of races in the game from the start (like Tieflings and Dragonborns)

Because I dont want to repeat myself and link the video with the ACTUAL 4E designers let me link to the last post in the same discussion: D&D General - Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.



No it would not be something bad to be inspired by WoW, however, it was and still is used as a slur against 4E, and also it is disrespectful against the actual people behind 4E which state different things and also it is disrespectful against the games which actually heavily influenced D&D 4E like Magic the Gathering, Soccer, Wargames, older D&D (and Feng Shui).


Again to not repeat myself, one can clearly see from the gamedesign (if you look a bit closer and use your brain) what the inspirations are: Why 4E gamedesign does not resemble WoW: D&D General - Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.

 

[Zardnaar]

Why do we at this point take anything which mearls said about original D&D 4E serious?

• He was NOT part of the original design team. He was just not there at all.
• He joined 9+ months later and NOT as a gamedesigner but as a tester/developer that was only later
• He is the most hated designer among all 4E fans. There are even theories that his job was to make 4E tank such that WotC has could make the next edition.
  • He was the person who profited most from 4E failing becoming the lead of 5E a game which he could design from the beginning
  • He was responsible for the most hated books
• He literally was not posting anything since years on these forums until now to make advertisement for his new game
• He exactly knows that stating "4E was made to be like WoW" will get huge visibility and lots of discussion because he was in other similar threads.

In an interview with the ACTUAL people behind 4E it was stated that yes 4E should make it easy for people from MMOs/WoW to join D&D but they also said that almost nothing in 4E was inspired by WoW

It is a huge difference to make it easy to join your game (by streamlining it, by not requiring old knowledge, etc.) than using inspiration from that other game.

From the interviews I watched with the key people of 4E, there where 3 things which were influenced by WoW

1. The business model of subscription
2. The fact that everyone is useful in combat (so no classes focused on the non combat parts alone)
3. Having a broad variety of races in the game from the start (like Tieflings and Dragonborns)

Because I dont want to repeat myself and link the video with the ACTUAL 4E designers let me link to the last post in the same discussion: D&D General - Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.



No it would not be something bad to be inspired by 4E, however, it was and still is used as a slur against 4E, and also it is disrespectful against the actual people behind 4E which state different things and also it is disrespectful against the games which actually heavily influenced D&D 4E: Magic the Gathering, Soccer, Wargames, older D&D (and Feng Shui).


Again to not repeat myself, one can clearly see from the gamedesign (if you look a bit closer) what the inspirations are: Why 4E gamedesign does not resemble WoW: D&D General - Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.

4E connection to MMO also comes from other sources like Art and Arcana book. People have been gaslighting the MMO connection for years essentially claiming what you're saying. No one recently has actually said 4E is WoW on paper.

They are saying there's an influence. Hard coded roles and refresh/encounter powers make it hard to not see it.

Jonathan Tweet also said in a Grandmother Fish AMA interview 4E was a disaster which lines up with what Mearls is saying about 4E alienating the playerbase.

 

[Desdichado]

Why do we at this point take anything which mearls said about original D&D 4E serious?

Your claims don't even rise to the level of a Wikipedia check. Mike started as a designer in 2005, and was part of the "flywheel" design team that led the design from that point until the launch in 2008.

That's why we take what he says about 4e more seriously than what you say; he was there and you weren't.

 

[myrkulyte]

Why do we at this point take anything which mearls said about original D&D 4E serious?

• He was NOT part of the original design team. He was just not there at all.
• He joined 9+ months later and NOT as a gamedesigner but as a tester/developer that was only later
• He is the most hated designer among all 4E fans. There are even theories that his job was to make 4E tank such that WotC has could make the next edition.
  • He was the person who profited most from 4E failing becoming the lead of 5E a game which he could design from the beginning
  • He was responsible for the most hated books
• He literally was not posting anything since years on these forums until now to make advertisement for his new game
• He exactly knows that stating "4E was made to be like WoW" will get huge visibility and lots of discussion because he was in other similar threads.

In an interview with the ACTUAL people behind 4E it was stated that yes 4E should make it easy for people from MMOs/WoW to join D&D but they also said that almost nothing in 4E was inspired by WoW

It is a huge difference to make it easy to join your game (by streamlining it, by not requiring old knowledge, etc.) than using inspiration from that other game.

From the interviews I watched with the key people of 4E, there where 3 things which were influenced by WoW

1. The business model of subscription
2. The fact that everyone is useful in combat (so no classes focused on the non combat parts alone)
3. Having a broad variety of races in the game from the start (like Tieflings and Dragonborns)

Because I dont want to repeat myself and link the video with the ACTUAL 4E designers let me link to the last post in the same discussion: D&D General - Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.



No it would not be something bad to be inspired by 4E, however, it was and still is used as a slur against 4E, and also it is disrespectful against the actual people behind 4E which state different things and also it is disrespectful against the games which actually heavily influenced D&D 4E: Magic the Gathering, Soccer, Wargames, older D&D (and Feng Shui).


Again to not repeat myself, one can clearly see from the gamedesign (if you look a bit closer) what the inspirations are: Why 4E gamedesign does not resemble WoW: D&D General - Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.

Citing ridiculous conspiracy theories about Mearls ruining 4e for his own benefit as evidence for why we shouldn't trust him is not going to discredit him as much as it is you.