Iosue
Legend
A while back I floated the idea of looking at Mearls' L&L articles from before the announcement of 5e, and comparing them with how the final game turned out, once all of the core three were released.
Now all three books are out and we have had a bit of time to digest them, so I thought I would go ahead! I don't have the best of records with these kinds of things (still have three threads in Limbo!), so I'm going to try doing two at a time, and aim to get through all 45 articles in a month or so.
So off we go!
Legends & Lore #1 - An Introduction
February 15, 2011
Original EN World thread
As the title suggests, in this article Mearls lays out why he's doing the column and what he hopes to accomplish. Essentials had just come out the previous September, so at this point there wasn't much thought of L&L being insight into a new edition, as the EN World thread shows. More like explorations of where 4e design was going to go post-Essentials. We know now, however, that at this time they were at least exploring where they wanted to go with 5e, with R&D soon (if not already) playing through all the editions of D&D.
What we do see here is the beginnings of 5e as a "unifying" version of D&D. The article opens with a lament over edition-warring, and an appeal to realize whatever one's own preference of edition, we're all in this together as fans of D&D.
The thrust of the article is that in order overcome these differences in the future, we need to look at the past, to see the road that brought us to the (then) current situation.
Then comes what is, in retrospect, the mission statement of 5e:
We can see here the movement towards less emphasis on tight, focused design and mechanics in favor of looser design that appeals to a wide swath of playstyles. Mearls would continue hitting this point all through playtest.
How did things end up in 5e?
Well, how unifying 5e ended up being is something of a debate. The movement towards looser design doesn’t really appeal to those who like tight, focused design. On the other hand, it does seem to appeal to a wide variety of groups and playstyles. At the least, we can say that 5e has been the least divisive of all WotC editions to-date.
Now all three books are out and we have had a bit of time to digest them, so I thought I would go ahead! I don't have the best of records with these kinds of things (still have three threads in Limbo!), so I'm going to try doing two at a time, and aim to get through all 45 articles in a month or so.
So off we go!
Legends & Lore #1 - An Introduction
February 15, 2011
Original EN World thread
As the title suggests, in this article Mearls lays out why he's doing the column and what he hopes to accomplish. Essentials had just come out the previous September, so at this point there wasn't much thought of L&L being insight into a new edition, as the EN World thread shows. More like explorations of where 4e design was going to go post-Essentials. We know now, however, that at this time they were at least exploring where they wanted to go with 5e, with R&D soon (if not already) playing through all the editions of D&D.
What we do see here is the beginnings of 5e as a "unifying" version of D&D. The article opens with a lament over edition-warring, and an appeal to realize whatever one's own preference of edition, we're all in this together as fans of D&D.
Mike Mearls said:These days, when we think about D&D’s past and present, we all too often think of it in adversarial tones. 4th Edition is a lame tabletop MMO. 3rd Edition is for number-crunching losers. 2nd Edition is for setting junkies. 1st Edition is for people obsessed with polearms. Let’s not even talk about Basic D&D. Who plays that? Take your pick of invective, cast your favorite edition in the most positive terms, and you have what seems an all too common discussion on the internet and in game shops. Even when you talk about an edition (or editions) positively, there can still be an air of defensiveness, as if you have to apologize for what you like in order to avoid making a perceived attack. We allow ourselves to open that proverbial quarrel.
The thrust of the article is that in order overcome these differences in the future, we need to look at the past, to see the road that brought us to the (then) current situation.
Mike Mearls said:In the end, understanding the past is far more than a mere bath in nostalgia. It’s about getting to the heart of Dungeons & Dragons. Whether you play the original game published in 1974, AD&D in any of its forms, 3rd Edition and its descendants, or 4th Edition, at the end of the day you’re playing D&D. D&D is what we make of it, and by "we" I mean the DMs, the players, the readers, the bloggers—everyone who has picked up a d20 and ventured into a dungeon.
Then comes what is, in retrospect, the mission statement of 5e:
Mike Mearls said:This may sound strange, coming from R&D—but it’s easy to mistake what Wizards of the Coast publishes as the core essence of D&D. We might print the rules for the current version of the game, or produce accessories you use at your table, but the game is what you, the community of D&D fans and players, make it. D&D is the moments in the game, the interplay within a gaming group, the memories formed that last forever. It’s intensely personal. It’s your experience as a group, the stories that you and your friends share to this day. No specific rule, no random opinion, no game concept from an R&D designer, no change to the game’s mechanics can alter that.
We can see here the movement towards less emphasis on tight, focused design and mechanics in favor of looser design that appeals to a wide swath of playstyles. Mearls would continue hitting this point all through playtest.
How did things end up in 5e?
Well, how unifying 5e ended up being is something of a debate. The movement towards looser design doesn’t really appeal to those who like tight, focused design. On the other hand, it does seem to appeal to a wide variety of groups and playstyles. At the least, we can say that 5e has been the least divisive of all WotC editions to-date.