From the WotC Boards: Mearls on 'Aggro'

[AdmundfortGeographer]

That's a personality glitch.

Speaking of personality glitches . . . tilting at MMO-windmills surely qualifies as one.

 

[Driddle]

Speaking of personality glitches . . . tilting at MMO-windmills surely qualifies as one.

Oh dear gawd -- those games have windmill monsters, too?! That's just weird.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, I'd agree ... except that D&D wasn't dull to begin with. There's nothing to alleviate.
Which means that they're testing online gaming concepts for the sheer sake of trying to make the game more online game-ish.

"Dull" is a highly relative term. I'm reminded of "20 minutes of fun crammed into 4 hours."

They're testing online gaming concepts for the sake of making more of those 4 hours fun. Or to make them MORE fun if they're already fun.

But by all means, if your game is a perfect alchemy resulting in an ideal gaming experience for you and your friends, don't go into 4e. Me, I'd like to cut some of 3e's chaffe and make high-level combat work smoothly and have a shallower arc of power and have powers that regenerate in every encounter and have roles for combat and social encounters and everything else.

I imagine the development team believes that they'd like to do some of the same things.

 

[Piratecat]

Yeah, I'd agree ... except that D&D wasn't dull to begin with. There's nothing to alleviate.
Which means that they're testing online gaming concepts for the sheer sake of trying to make the game more online game-ish.

On the off chance that you're trolling, Senor Driddle, please stop. This isn't what we need right now.

Thanks. Ping me if you want to discuss it.

 

[Celebrim]

For everyone concerned that 4E is too much like MMORPGs, this is Mearls explicitly saying they've rejected an MMORPG mechanic, because it sucked in D&D.

Yes, apparantly they initially set out to make a video game. Gradually they are coming to thier senses. I hope it isn't too late.

I'm reminded of mid-production script changes to the Lord of the Rings movies. Initially PJ set out to tell a story radically different from the books. Eventually they realized that this wasn't working out as well as they hoped, and they started moving them back toward the originals. (We have Christopher Lee, true geek hero, to thank in part for that.) Still, while realizing the error of your ways is admirable, it would make me more comfortable if they'd never attempted it in the first place.

Mearls, remember when you said in that interview that an RPG should never tell the players how to play it? You were right!. Remember when you said that 2nd edition showed you how not to make a game, because it mostly wanted take out the parts that the designers didn't think were fun. You were right about that too! Put down the saw! Stop amputating things and start fixing things. If there could be a bit less, 'We are taking this out because it isn't fun.', and a bit more, 'How can we make this more fun for the players who like it?', I might actually come around to 4e.

 

[Fifth Element]

Yes, apparantly they initially set out to make a video game. Gradually they are coming to thier senses. I hope it isn't too late.

That's the negative interpretation. The fairer interpretation is that they were open-minded and willing to try out mechanics that work in another medium, to see if they work in D&D. Finding one that didn't, they dropped it.

It would be shortsighted and counterproductive to say "we can't try that, that's like a video game". This has nothing to do with coming to their senses. They were trying new things, dropping what didn't work and keeping what did. That just shows they're doing their jobs properly.

Rejecting a MMO concept out of hand simply because it's a MMO concept is as bad as adding a MMO concept just because it's a MMO concept.

 

[Mortellan]

Amazing comments from Mearls. It's not good that they need more justification for their design plans. This one is reassuring but still troubles me as to what is next. So far I'm still leaning away from 4E but there is plenty of time for them to make this work.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

This is... debatable. At best.

Well, it depends on the MMORPG, and even then, good dev teams continue to refine it over the life of the game.

The problem is that, currently, AI can't be made smart enough to react intelligently in an MMORPG, especially when there might be thousands or even millions of combats going on simultaneously.

So we get aggro instead, where offensive things add a set number of points, and the player character with the highest point total "wins."

I'm as eager as anyone to see this replaced with better AI, but until we see a LOT more processing power, both server side and on user end, I don't think it's likely to be showing up any time soon.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Still, while realizing the error of your ways is admirable, it would make me more comfortable if they'd never attempted it in the first place.

Why?

I prefer my designers -- whatever the game -- to try anything that looks like it might be a good idea and to ruthlessly reject any that don't, whatever their source, even from previous editions.

The day the designers start refusing to even countenance certain design possibilities, it's time to get new designers.

 

[Mortellan]

That's the negative interpretation. The fairer interpretation is that they were open-minded and willing to try out mechanics that work in another medium, to see if they work in D&D. Finding one that didn't, they dropped it.

It would be shortsighted and counterproductive to say "we can't try that, that's like a video game". This has nothing to do with coming to their senses. They were trying new things, dropping what didn't work and keeping what did. That just shows they're doing their jobs properly.

Rejecting a MMO concept out of hand simply because it's a MMO concept is as bad as adding a MMO concept just because it's a MMO concept.

Very true, I think what is at stake here is being the lead in innovation. People say D&D inspires this and that game, now the tables seem to be turned. IMO what was great about 3e's design was the introduction of feats. What will be the feat of 4e?