Legends & Lore - Mike Mearls' new column

[Nemesis Destiny]

I've used this term before in connection with this sort of discussion and it applies here as well; this was a fairly well-written olive branch offered to the warring factions of the Edition Wars. Those who don't accept it, well, to borrow another over-used clichéd phrase, "haters gonna hate."

 

[OnlineDM]

I liked the article, too. I take it as, "We're going to keep producing content for our current edition of the game, but we're cool with the fact that lots of people like to play the older editions, too. It's all good." I don't expect WotC to start producing new crunch content for older editions, but maybe the fluff will have more nods to the past (you have to admit that mining nostalgia is a profitable vein for them).

 

[Incenjucar]

It reinforces the impression that I've been getting that the folks at WotC, along with many gamers, are actively mournful of the divisive edition wars and the turning of favored games into factions that have infected the gaming culture. Beyond just D&D, pockets of gamers have been claiming one edition or one game as the only game worth acknowledging, with any variations or related products being abominations to be looked down on or actively fought against. While for many the concern over these divisions may be rooted in profit motive or the desire to see continued support for their favorites, many, including many if not most of WotC's staff, have a non-exclusive love of gaming and the gaming community, and seeing the infighting and rancor is increasingly distressing.

 

[Dire Bare]

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

Where does he do that? Not in this article.

 

[Zaran]

You know, I love 4e. I GM several games and love playing PCs when I get the oppurtunity, but I rather WotC Developers to stop trying to do wacky things and go back to their Core worlds and rules and perfect them.

I think of what they are doing with trying to put out a fire with a leaky bucket. Yeah, they might be making progress but it would go alot faster if they plug the holes instead of ignoring all the wasted water. I HATE how they fix the rules by putting now new builds and feats instead of going back and just fixing things. It leaves the game spread all over place like the wasted water in my metaphor. We have races that are not updated and we have obsolete feats. We have class builds that are unusable. We have a treasure system that is only half updated. We have a new focus on the classic parts of DnD but with little support for that which came before.

Does this make me want to switch games or editions? No, I still think 4e is best at alot of things. It just annoys me that instead of seeing any work done for what affects my game, I see Fortune Cards, Board games, and Vampire Classes.

I do have an answer though. Do BOTH! Put someone in charge of updating what has come before, along with inventing of new crap that might attract more sales.

 

[Dedekind]

You know, I love 4e. I GM several games and love playing PCs when I get the oppurtunity, but I rather WotC Developers to stop trying to do wacky things and go back to their Core worlds and rules and perfect them.

But, again, there are two camps. Some people hate that what is put out is being errata'd and that their books are "wrong" a month after they bought them. Others hate that the mechanics don't work optimally and want fixes. WotC literally cannot please both camps with respect to their older material.

For new material, they have adopted the policy of more development time. That will ideally eliminate both problems--but now leads to less content.

That all sounds very pessimistic, so let me change tones.

I really like that Mearls is noting that D&D is D&D, regardless of rule system. I still have fun because of who I play with, not what I'm playing. I had a blast in 3e and we just glossed over the parts that were annoying. We are having a blast in 4e and we still gloss over the parts that are annoying. I still look back and laugh at me trying to figure out THAC0 for the first time.

 

[BobTheNob]

I kinda like that the guy at the wheel is philosophical about the whole thing. It means he can look at the situation and gauge it, helping WOTC understand its direction.

If we had some rule-nut at the helm who didnt engage in this thought, you would just end up with a game where material is being released too fast and with not enough quality control, that is bloated, break prone and constantly in need of errata.

Hmmmmm......

 

[Zaran]

But, again, there are two camps. Some people hate that what is put out is being errata'd and that their books are "wrong" a month after they bought them. Others hate that the mechanics don't work optimally and want fixes. WotC literally cannot please both camps with respect to their older material.

If people don't like errata they can just not use it. It's silly to not do errata if it needs to be done. I seriously doubt that the "We hate errata camp" is the majority. It's really nice that they are now focusing on quality over quanity as Mearls said in the last Podcast but that does nothing for things that have already been produced.

 

[keterys]

I'm pretty sure that if something isn't actually _broken_, it's not getting errata-ed. And trust me, a 5% difference in damage or a +1 or +2 here or there isn't broken. The word gets overused. They get a lot of flak for any kind of errata they do, so I'm pretty sure they're going to be more careful about any more they do in the future.

I'd suggest instead just excluding some old material from your campaign, or being aggressive about fixing it yourself.

Unfortunately, games like LFR are kinda inherently stuck by their stance of accepting everything, including everything old, and freely giving out any combination of magic items you want... it's a much higher bar of optimization than many other games, for good or ill.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

*Note to self*: If you read an article at Wotc with a positive outlook, the respective ENworld thread will reduce the bubblegum'n'teddybear-factor by approx. 83%.
Conclusion: Smiles couldn't exist without teethgnashing. Thank you for your time.