Mearls' "Stop, Thief!" Article

[mudlock]

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Stop, Thief!)

"Saddled with a variety of at best unreliable skills, the thief forced me to improvise, invent, and interact* with the game in ways the other classes weren’t forced to."

Seriously? Mike Mearls, head of D&D R&D, believes that crappy rules are just great!, because they force you to find creative ways to not use them?

If he were just waxing nostalgic about the hilarious olden days and the stupid things we did, that would be one thing, but it sure doesn't sound like that's what he's saying here.

Please, someone tell me I'm reading this wrong; that the #1 rules-guy doesn't really think that bad rules are good.

 

[malraux]

I think its more that the rules function as blinders to all possible options. Now, rules can't not do that, but really the most interesting events (IMO) happen outside of those rules. And it is important for the rules designer to be aware of that, because he can either make rules that strengthen those blinders, or lessen them.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Please, someone tell me I'm reading this wrong; that the #1 rules-guy doesn't really think that bad rules are good.

Everything not being guaranteed != "bad rules"

 

[IanB]

Please, someone tell me I'm reading this wrong; that the #1 rules-guy doesn't really think that bad rules are good.

You're reading it wrong. I certainly don't think he's saying that bad rules are better than good rules, I think he's just saying that the experience of playing with bad rules can sometimes make someone a better player (or GM), which I totally agree with. I'm not saying going out and playing F.A.T.A.L. is going to help, but playing earlier editions of D&D and similar systems can be pretty instructive.

 

[LostSoul]

"Saddled with a variety of at best unreliable skills, the thief forced me to improvise, invent, and interact* with the game in ways the other classes weren’t forced to."

Seriously? Mike Mearls, head of D&D R&D, believes that crappy rules are just great!, because they force you to find creative ways to not use them?

I think he's saying that

1. Thieves had a poor chance of success when using skills
2. This forced him to improvise, invent, and interact
3. He really enjoyed doing that

I don't see how you can frame rules that reinforce what the game is about as crappy rules. Maybe you don't like the same type of game mearls talks about, but I think it's pretty obvious why they work for him, and why they work for others.

It's interesting that when you gain levels and your skills start to rise to the point where you might actually use them, what's happening is that how you play the game is changing. You no longer have to improvise, invent, and interact. That's a neat trick; I imagine that you've been through so many traps already that you don't mind rolling for a few now that you're name level.

 

[P1NBACK]

Does anyone have an interview or reference somewhere explaining why/how they decided on the Thief skill percentages?

 

[ForeverSlayer]

They just locked the L&L thread over on the Wizard's site. Looks like the devs just run, lock all their doors, and hide. Happens when people point out mistakes and others fail to acknowledge them and admit it.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I think he's saying that

1. Thieves had a poor chance of success when using skills
2. This forced him to improvise, invent, and interact
3. He really enjoyed doing that

I don't see how you can frame rules that reinforce what the game is about as crappy rules. Maybe you don't like the same type of game mearls talks about, but I think it's pretty obvious why they work for him, and why they work for others.

It's interesting that when you gain levels and your skills start to rise to the point where you might actually use them, what's happening is that how you play the game is changing. You no longer have to improvise, invent, and interact. That's a neat trick; I imagine that you've been through so many traps already that you don't mind rolling for a few now that you're name level.

Thing is he was talking about a thief that I think most people didn't use. Hell the d6 HD thief came out like 2 or 3 years later and was used for 11 years.

Why are you going to point out a bad class that was only used for a short time to represent the thief? That would be like having "Clear Pepsi" represent "Pepsi" products as a whole.

 

[IanB]

Thing is he was talking about a thief that I think most people didn't use. Hell the d6 HD thief came out like 2 or 3 years later and was used for 11 years.

Why are you going to point out a bad class that was only used for a short time to represent the thief? That would be like having "Clear Pepsi" represent "Pepsi" products as a whole.

Um... what? The 1e thief was used for a lot longer than 2 or 3 years.

 

[Scribble]

He's not saying bad rules are good- He's saying that one of the strengths of tabletop RPGs is their ability to bend, and the ability of a human interface (the DM) to improvise.

The article as a whole really isn't about the thief at all- he's just using that as a vehicle for his larger point- the ability to improvise is a strong point of tRPGs, and something a good DM should foster.

The "bad" rules of the 1e thief served to highlight this because there wasn't much else he could do BUT improvise with the system.

This doesn't mean bad rules are good- just that improvisation is.