Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L 3/11/2013 This Week in D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 6099439" data-attributes="member: 85870"><p>The biggest problem Mike Mearls has at this point is that he's pretty much lost credibility with the two largest factions of the D&D fanbase. WotC completely burned all of its loyal 3.x fans with 4e. And since the announcement of next, there's been little said to 4e fans to make them think Next is going to be the experience they want. </p><p></p><p>So as of now, no matter what Mearls intends, the 3e crowd subconsciously adds "And I'm the guy who created 4e" to everything he says. </p><p></p><p>I take nothing that comes from official WotC channels at face value. Absolutely nothing. At this point, D&D Next could be anything from a literal reprint of 1e with ascending Armor Class and fewer saving throws, or it could resemble the most hardcore of hardcore narrativist systems with minimal dice rolling, and it wouldn't surprise me, because in my mind, there's nothing that makes me believe anything Mearls says in these articles has any real bearing on what the end product will look like. </p><p></p><p>For the 4e supporters, they're pretty much spot on (in my opinion) that D&D Next is very specifically a reactionary move against 4e. It's "D&D - The 'Oops, My Bad for 4e'" edition. </p><p></p><p>Mearls has never come out and said it, and never will. But the design elements presented in the playtest so far seem to indicate this is the case. I think most 4e supporters would be more apt to let it go if he would just admit it. "Yes, we're building this game as a reactionary move to re-position D&D with less 4e elements." I think most 4e fans would respect that level of transparency. Doesn't mean they'd like or buy the end product, but at least they could respect the man and the company that said it. At this point they're basically left to speculate while Mearls and other WotC mouthpieces dance around the issue. </p><p></p><p>So no, I'm not surprised at all at the criticism these articles receive.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 6099439, member: 85870"] The biggest problem Mike Mearls has at this point is that he's pretty much lost credibility with the two largest factions of the D&D fanbase. WotC completely burned all of its loyal 3.x fans with 4e. And since the announcement of next, there's been little said to 4e fans to make them think Next is going to be the experience they want. So as of now, no matter what Mearls intends, the 3e crowd subconsciously adds "And I'm the guy who created 4e" to everything he says. I take nothing that comes from official WotC channels at face value. Absolutely nothing. At this point, D&D Next could be anything from a literal reprint of 1e with ascending Armor Class and fewer saving throws, or it could resemble the most hardcore of hardcore narrativist systems with minimal dice rolling, and it wouldn't surprise me, because in my mind, there's nothing that makes me believe anything Mearls says in these articles has any real bearing on what the end product will look like. For the 4e supporters, they're pretty much spot on (in my opinion) that D&D Next is very specifically a reactionary move against 4e. It's "D&D - The 'Oops, My Bad for 4e'" edition. Mearls has never come out and said it, and never will. But the design elements presented in the playtest so far seem to indicate this is the case. I think most 4e supporters would be more apt to let it go if he would just admit it. "Yes, we're building this game as a reactionary move to re-position D&D with less 4e elements." I think most 4e fans would respect that level of transparency. Doesn't mean they'd like or buy the end product, but at least they could respect the man and the company that said it. At this point they're basically left to speculate while Mearls and other WotC mouthpieces dance around the issue. So no, I'm not surprised at all at the criticism these articles receive. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
L&L 3/11/2013 This Week in D&D
Top