Legends & Lore - Mike Mearls' new column

[Nemesis Destiny]

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (An Introduction)

I liked this column. In it, he addresses an issue that's been cropping up seemingly more often of late - the fracturing of the community, and suggests that rather than focusing on our differences among "factions," that we instead celebrate and explore that which we all have in common. This is a sentiment I agree with, and an attitude I wish more would adopt.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, I felt a little warm and fuzzy at the end of that.

And the talk about it all being personal with the group gives me a lot of hope that under Mearls, D&D will not try and give us a D&D that is independent of a group and of personal customization (as hard as legal tries to silence any hint of possible IP infringement risk, to the detriment of the game as a whole).

He's got a bigger problem then most before him, in this case.

Nice, but vague and broad. Feels good, doesn't mean much. We shall see.

 

[DNH]

Nice article.

But he uses the word "forward" instead of "foreword" not once, but twice. And that, with me being a shameless pedant, put me off.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Hmmmm, Mike should stop apologizing for making big changes to D&D...

 

[Dice4Hire]

A quite good article. Overall, I am impressed with the new set of weekly articles, and I hope they are free. The communication is nice.

 

[wedgeski]

I liked this article. It's the sort of thing normally only said in interviews and sound-bites. I doubt whether expressions of solidarity are going to hold much truck with those who've left WotC behind but it certainly cements Mearls as the "man for all seasons" at Wizards. If nothing else his love for D&D in all its incarnations can never be in doubt.

 

[Balesir]

There's nice sentiment in the article, but it reinforces my fear that Mike Mearls is trying to make D&D "all things to all men" again. The focus and purpose that 4E has will be gravely at risk if they try too hard to make D&D the "perfect game for anything". What we will end up with will be reminiscent of the words of Cecil B. Demille: "For a dancer, she's not a bad singer. And, for a singer, she's not a bad dancer."

 

[wedgeski]

There's nice sentiment in the article, but it reinforces my fear that Mike Mearls is trying to make D&D "all things to all men" again. The focus and purpose that 4E has will be gravely at risk if they try too hard to make D&D the "perfect game for anything". What we will end up with will be reminiscent of the words of Cecil B. Demille: "For a dancer, she's not a bad singer. And, for a singer, she's not a bad dancer."

I don't think one could look at the intensely focused design goals of 4E (relaxed a little for Essentials, but only on the margins) and say that they're trying to make D&D "all things to all men".

 

[pauljathome]

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (An Introduction)

I liked this column. In it, he addresses an issue that's been cropping up seemingly more often of late - the fracturing of the community, and suggests that rather than focusing on our differences among "factions," that we instead celebrate and explore that which we all have in common. This is a sentiment I agree with, and an attitude I wish more would adopt.

While I mostly liked the article I found it ironic that he is talking only about D&D and not about roleplaying games in general.

Just about everything that he says applies to ALL roleplaying games.

So, in an article calling for us to embrace our similarities he starts by carving the industry into two disparate chunks

 

[renau1g]

You find it ironic? His employer publishes the game and makes money on it. His livelihood is based on it. Apple doesn't run out and pimp all smart phones, just their own. EA doesn't run out and talk about all the great FPS options out there, just their own.

He also did mention 3e "and it's descendants" I'm sure referring to PF and all the other d20 products based on the OGL (that was what it was called right?)