WotC Mike Mearls: "D&D Is Uncool Again"

Monster_Manual_Traditional_Cover_Art_copy.webp


In Mike Mearls' recent interview with Ben Riggs, he talks about how he feels that Dungeons & Dragons has had its moment, and is now uncool again. Mearls was one of the lead designers of D&D 5E and became the franchise's Creative Director in 2018. He worked at WotC until he was laid off in 2023. He is now EP of roleplaying games at Chaosium, the publisher of Call of Chulhu.

My theory is that when you look back at the OGL, the real impact of it is that it made D&D uncool again. D&D was cool, right? You had Joe Manganiello and people like that openly talking about playing D&D. D&D was something that was interesting, creative, fun, and different. And I think what the OGL did was take that concept—that Wizards and this idea of creativity that is inherent in the D&D brand because it's a roleplaying game, and I think those two things were sundered. And I don’t know if you can ever put them back together.

I think, essentially, it’s like that phrase: The Mandate of Heaven. I think fundamentally what happened was that Wizards has lost the Mandate of Heaven—and I don’t see them even trying to get it back.

What I find fascinating is that it was Charlie Hall who wrote that article. This is the same Charlie Hall who wrote glowing reviews of the 5.5 rulebooks. And then, at the same time, he’s now writing, "This is your chance because D&D seems to be stumbling." How do you square that? How do I go out and say, "Here are the two new Star Wars movies. They’re the best, the most amazing, the greatest Star Wars movies ever made. By the way, Star Wars has never been weaker. Now is the time for other sci-fi properties", like, to me that doesn’t make any sense! To me, it’s a context thing again.

Maybe this is the best Player’s Handbook ever written—but the vibes, the audience, the people playing these games—they don’t seem excited about it. We’re not seeing a groundswell of support and excitement. Where are the third-party products? That’s what I'd ask. Because that's what you’d think, "oh, there’s a gap", I mean remember before the OGL even came up, back when 3.0 launched, White Wolf had a monster book. There were multiple adventures at Gen Con. The license wasn’t even official yet, and there were already adventures showing up in stores. We're not seeing that, what’s ostensibly the new standard going forward? If anything, we’re seeing the opposite—creators are running in the opposite direction. I mean, that’s where I’m going.

And hey—to plug my Patreon—patreon.com/mikemearls (one word). This time last year, when I was looking at my post-Wizards options, I thought, "Well, maybe I could start doing 5E-compatible stuff." And now what I’m finding is…I just don’t want to. Like—it just seems boring. It’s like trying to start a hair metal band in 1992. Like—No, no, no. Everyone’s mopey and we're wearing flannel. It's Seattle and rain. It’s Nirvana now, man. It’s not like Poison. And that’s the vibe I get right now, yeah, Poison was still releasing albums in the ’90s. They were still selling hundreds of thousands or a million copies. But they didn’t have any of the energy. It's moved on. But what’s interesting to me is that roleplaying game culture is still there. And that’s what I find fascinating about gaming in general—especially TTRPGs. I don’t think we’ve ever had a period where TTRPGs were flourishing, and had a lot of energy and excitement around them, and D&D wasn’t on the upswing. Because I do think that’s what’s happening now. We’re in very strange waters where I think D&D is now uncool.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are some folks that just cant help themselves. I, myself, know that if I dont like "story now" I should stay out of threads that talk about playing them. Now, a thread that asks my opinion on "story now", ok I was asked. I mean, there was a thread about "what podcasts folks listen to" and the 3 out of the first 5 responses where, "none, I dont listen to any"...

Maybe that's why I don't see it. I don't bother because I've tried story now and it just didn't work for me. On the other hand if you start talking about how great the method is on a thread that has nothing to do with it or is only sort-of related I may explain that it doesn't work for me. We all get different things out of gaming and approach the hobby with different perspectives. I wouldn't expect everyone to like exactly what I happen to like.

On the other hand you can hardly have a thread here that's talking about 5e 2014 or 2024 without negative comments popping up on the first page and it's pretty much inevitable by the third.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Most other RPGs aren't bad idk most of them. They're pointless buying though as you'll struggle with getting players.

Essentially they're an expensive book end.
 

Then you definitely have selective viewing when non-D&D games get regularly trashed here. There are people who regularly derail discussions of non-D&D games here and call them dysfunctional games, not true roleplaying games, or badwrongfun.
I've seen people say a type of game isn't for them, especially pbta games. Some people don't like 4E and can explain while which always seems to cause a ruckus. There's a difference between "I don't like X" if it comes up in conversation and going onto a forum dedicated to the current version of DnD and telling everyone repeatedly that it's terrible and you wished it didn't exist.
Please note the point that I put in bold. I am speaking of language that goes beyond "I don't like X."

And to be clear, I am not a fan of people coming into D&D 5e threads saying that it's terrible either. However, I would also distinguish between criticism of 5e, including its strengths and weaknesses, and people who are just haters. I try not to say too much about 5e D&D at this point simply because it's more a case of falling out of love with 5e and going separate ways than anything.
 

Given that, as a general proposition of US private law, voluntary promises are not binding, some of us had noticed the legal possibility from the outset.
at what point does a voluntary promise become a binding contract? I don’t think you can call a contract paper a promise, otherwise no contract would be more than a promise
 

at what point does a voluntary promise become a binding contract? I don’t think you can call a contract paper a promise, otherwise no contract would be more than a promise
In general terms, in US law a contract comes into being when consideration - executed or executory - has flowed in both directions. If I offer to license to you, and you in exchange make a promise to me (eg to offer to license your content to others) then we have a contract.

That doesn't mean I can't retract an offer to others that they have not taken up. Even if I've promised to those others that I won't retract the offer.
 


that part is fine, but it has nothing to do with what WotC was attempting
I'm pretty sure you took part in some of the late 2022/early 2023 threads. This was all discussed then, including the extent to which the rights of (say) Paizo to license the SRD that WotC had licensed to it would survive WotC's withdrawal of its unilateral offer to license to newcomers.
 

I'm pretty sure you took part in some of the late 2022/early 2023 threads. This was all discussed then, including the extent to which the rights of (say) Paizo to license the SRD that WotC had licensed to it would survive WotC's withdrawal of its unilateral offer to license to newcomers.
pretty sure too, just wondering where you saw the issue here. Consideration is not the issue, anyone using the OGL has that and can keep on using it. As I wrote, what WotC was attempting had nothing to do with what you were describing as its potential weakness

In any case, with the SRD in CC this is now moot, the question now is whether we get a new SRD
 

pretty sure too, just wondering where you saw the issue here. Consideration is not the issue, anyone using the OGL has that and can keep on using it. As I wrote, what WotC was attempting had nothing to do with what you were describing as its potential weakness
I don't recall that WotC was purporting to stop anyone distributing already licensed works.

In any case, with the SRD in CC this is now moot, the question now is whether we get a new SRD
It's not moot, actually, because the legal operation of CC is also complex and contestable. I published links to some of the relevant literature in some of those threads.

The basic point is that it is not easy, in US contract law, to impose obligations on parties who are not themselves related by way of contract. And this is not a coincidence - it is a key feature of the transition of the common law from a feudal/early modern approach to a liberal/market approach, which peaked probably in the 19th century in the UK and in the early 20th century in the US.

CC and the OGL attempt to retreat, in certain ways, from that liberal/market ideal.
 

In any case, with the SRD in CC this is now moot, the question now is whether we get a new SRD

I am pretty confident we will. It's really in WOTC's best interest to do so. WOTC wants more publishers writing material compatible with D&D 2024. That way other publishers risk their own money on compatible products and WOTC can bless the successful ones for ingestion into D&D Beyond. Then WOTC gets a percentage of those successful products while also increasing the gravity well of D&D Beyond. The 5.2 SRD is their marketing push towards publishers to support their new flagship product.

One thing I think many people miss is that WOTC won the whole OGL catastrophe. They never worried about small publishers making small-run products. They wanted to get their percentage from high-selling products. And now they do. It's called D&D Beyond.

I'm highly confident we'll see it this year and pretty confident we'll see it by mid-summer (I'll say July 1st). Keep this in mind if you want to tell me "I told you so" on July 2nd.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top