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
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
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="pickin_grinnin" data-source="post: 7760512" data-attributes="member: 6697674"><p>Yes, exactly!</p><p></p><p>I started playing and GMing D&D way back in the Holmes boxed set era. There have been a lot of changes to D&D over time that go beyond simple differences between the rules in various editions.</p><p></p><p>Back when I started, the basic rules were very minimal (and sometimes contradictory), so pretty much everyone interpreted, altered, and/or added to them for their own group(s). It was highly encouraged by TSR (primarily through their Dragon magazine), though not everyone read that. It was pretty common for GMs and players to not know anything about the company, the writers, the designers, and their game philosophy. AD&D expanded the rule set quite a bit (and the number of contradictory rules and loopholes, even), but the general DIY ethic was still the predominant one. </p><p></p><p>Once you got to 3 and 3e, though, there was a shift in tone, both from the company itself and within the player base. The rules became more complex, and (in my experience) rules lawyering became a bigger issue in general. "Optimized builds" became a bigger thing, mainly because more complex systems make that more of a possibility. I can't speak for everyone, but in my experience rules lawyering became a bigger issue in most places. I started seeing more conflict between DMs and players when it came to attitudes towards RAW and RAI, too. I got the sense that Wizards of the Coast were starting to put a little more emphasis on the idea of D&D being played in a similar fashion from table to table, too. It was the introduction of league play that really cemented that idea, though.</p><p></p><p>Game design theories, meta arguments, RAW vs. RAI, character optimization, and a lot of other things changed radically when the general public moved onto the Internet en masse, in the late 90s. A lot of the rancor, heated arguments, absolutism, and other unfortunate things that are issues today were not that common in the pre-Internet era, when people had to either talk to each other or write books, columns, letters, etc. It is far more than a doubling effect - more like a 100 times (or more) plus.</p><p></p><p>This situation makes things very difficult for Wizards of the Coast. Since D&D is the most well-known and most played rpg, people tend to view it as a system that has something for everyone. It isn't a generic system, though, and a lot of people who play it remember a time when fewer people thought that the rules were cast in iron. There is often a big difference in expectations and general philosophy between people who played in the pre-3e days, those who got their start with 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder, and those who are coming into the hobby after a lifetime of playing videogames. </p><p></p><p>The designers of D&D should probably just pick a direction and go with it, since designing the most popular rpg in the world to try to suit all of those groups is very problematic. WotC is motivated the keep presenting the game in that way, though, to maximize their profits. The reluctance of many players these days to learn more than one rpg ruleset probably influences that, as well.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pickin_grinnin, post: 7760512, member: 6697674"] Yes, exactly! I started playing and GMing D&D way back in the Holmes boxed set era. There have been a lot of changes to D&D over time that go beyond simple differences between the rules in various editions. Back when I started, the basic rules were very minimal (and sometimes contradictory), so pretty much everyone interpreted, altered, and/or added to them for their own group(s). It was highly encouraged by TSR (primarily through their Dragon magazine), though not everyone read that. It was pretty common for GMs and players to not know anything about the company, the writers, the designers, and their game philosophy. AD&D expanded the rule set quite a bit (and the number of contradictory rules and loopholes, even), but the general DIY ethic was still the predominant one. Once you got to 3 and 3e, though, there was a shift in tone, both from the company itself and within the player base. The rules became more complex, and (in my experience) rules lawyering became a bigger issue in general. "Optimized builds" became a bigger thing, mainly because more complex systems make that more of a possibility. I can't speak for everyone, but in my experience rules lawyering became a bigger issue in most places. I started seeing more conflict between DMs and players when it came to attitudes towards RAW and RAI, too. I got the sense that Wizards of the Coast were starting to put a little more emphasis on the idea of D&D being played in a similar fashion from table to table, too. It was the introduction of league play that really cemented that idea, though. Game design theories, meta arguments, RAW vs. RAI, character optimization, and a lot of other things changed radically when the general public moved onto the Internet en masse, in the late 90s. A lot of the rancor, heated arguments, absolutism, and other unfortunate things that are issues today were not that common in the pre-Internet era, when people had to either talk to each other or write books, columns, letters, etc. It is far more than a doubling effect - more like a 100 times (or more) plus. This situation makes things very difficult for Wizards of the Coast. Since D&D is the most well-known and most played rpg, people tend to view it as a system that has something for everyone. It isn't a generic system, though, and a lot of people who play it remember a time when fewer people thought that the rules were cast in iron. There is often a big difference in expectations and general philosophy between people who played in the pre-3e days, those who got their start with 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder, and those who are coming into the hobby after a lifetime of playing videogames. The designers of D&D should probably just pick a direction and go with it, since designing the most popular rpg in the world to try to suit all of those groups is very problematic. WotC is motivated the keep presenting the game in that way, though, to maximize their profits. The reluctance of many players these days to learn more than one rpg ruleset probably influences that, as well. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top