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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 5778087" data-attributes="member: 5142">We are probably expecting too much from D&D-Next, not because it will fail on its promises, but because we may have a different understanding of what D&D-Next is actually promising us. There seems to be an impression that D&D-Next is offering "Everything for Everyone!" as I heard one skeptic on this forum say. But is D&D-Next actually promising that? So how about we take a look more closely, calmly, and rationally at what the <a href="http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=dnd5e" target="_blank">Design Goals and Mechanics</a> are actually saying? I propose we analyze - predictably to the point of absurd semantics - what has been said so far. I see two parts to this statement, each with a different, though related, thrust. The bold is a declaration of the goal, which wants to bring together "players of all types and styles to play a D&D game together." The extent of what "all types and styles," is of course debatable, and I see this as more of a generalized recognition of our different playstyles. The orange is the instrumental of the first clause, as it indicates how D&D-Next intends to address the bold. The orange is in part where "Everything for everyone!" (mis)understanding may be coming from. The orange, as I understand it, is not promising everything that we want from every edition to be an option. Instead, Mearls is basically suggesting a form of "D&D Essentialism" (note: not a new product line) where there is some sort of "essence" or "soul" of what D&D is, which can somehow be assembled from the best aspects of Editions 1-4. Alarm bells should be going off right about now, and I can't blame you. After all, who is to say what constitutes the "best of each edition"? As the New Horizons sub-forum demonstrates, we do not see eye-to-eye on what's "best of each edition." De-emphasize the mechanics for the sake of the story and greater freedom for different DM/player styles.And here is the other quote that seems to form our perhaps misplaced expectations. Each point of the bold statement gives us reason to ask "How modular? How flexible? And how easily customizable to my preferences?" We don't know. Mearls then compares DM ruleset customization to character creation. It's not a radical idea: DMs have been doing it for years. Mearls then provides an example where a particular type of campaign (i.e. military) can then have a set of modular options that include the "miniatures rules" and the martial arts optional rules. If I'm reading this correctly, then there are a variety of different combat rulesets, but miniatures rules is not a series of different rulesets, but one of the combat rulesets. This reading leads me to believe that we are not getting "everything for everyone" or variations within variations of rules, at least not to the extent seemingly expected. This statement seems fairly straightforward. D&D has increasingly become more complex. That's undoubtedly debatable, but it has become more rules heavy. He makes the appeal, however, "to go back to the original D&D." (It's basically a rhetorical appeal to the ancestors.) Mearls seems to indicate a desire to simplify and streamline the rules, likely for the sake of increased accessibility for new players. Whether or not this means that there will be "layers of complexity" options in the modules, as is generally assumed, remains to be seen. Both of these quotes seem to indicate that the paladin is obviously dead weight to their party. But I'm looking forward to more "Heroic things I did while the paladin almost died" updates from them. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I will add more of the other quotes that seem indicative of their design philosophy later, but I need to do other things. In the meantime, how do you interpret the official quotes of D&D Next?</blockquote>

Verification