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

What do you mean? Do you think people complaining online will somehow ruin the billions and billions of dollars Disney has made since they bought the franchise from Lucas?
they started high and ended low. Their movies made subsequently less money until Solo did not even break even. Their TV series are following a similar trajectory.

So as far as being a good steward goes, I am not seeing it, even if it made them enough money to recoup the investment

I mean, there's a difference between what a fan may think of what they've done with it, and how much money they've actually made from it. We're really talking about the latter here.
I am more looking at the trajectory of what they did with it than on whether they managed to recoup their investment, and that is not a success story
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Popularity. The same way TSR did with 2E.

But the definition of "edge" is a fuzzy thing that doesn't always track the some with different people. There's some definitely "edgy" stuff in van Richtens, for example, and a lot of the stuff in "Book of Vile Darkness" was silly rather than "edgy."

I loved 2E, especially the settings, but D&D was definitely not cool during that era (it was the sort of thing you kept quiet about in public). I do remember it having some coolness in the early 80s, and I think some of the Satanic Panic probably helped with that (just gave it an impression of being forbidden and dangerous)
 

In terms Edginess that is tricky, because if you try too hard with edginess, it doesn't work, if you make the game too wholesome, it feels bland. I don't think D&D is ever going to be like 90s WW in terms of being that kind of cool and edgy (which I am sure today is the least edgy or cool thing in the world, but trust me when I say Vampire used to be extremely cool as RPGs go). But D&D can have flashes of edginess that give it flavor and still work
 

they started high and ended low. Their movies made subsequently less money until Solo did not even break even. Their TV series are following a similar trajectory.

So as far as being a good steward goes, I am not seeing it, even if it made them enough money to recoup the investment


I am more looking at the trajectory of what they dod with it than on whether they managed to recoup their investment, and that is not a success story
the sequel trilogy is 3 of the 4 top slots for box office revenue (plus Rogue 1).
 

I am more looking at the trajectory of what they dod with it than on whether they managed to recoup their investment, and that is not a success story
Obviously, that's subjective. That's like asking someone if they thought The Last Jedi was a great Star Wars movie or a terrible Star Wars movie, and I say that clearly knowing there is a huge divide on that. Even more, if a lot of fans thought The Book of Fett was a badly reviewed show, you also have Andor, which received rave reviews and had a lot to say about authoritarianism.

I mean, you could say the same thing pre-Disney. There's a lot of people who thought Lucas didn't have a steady hand with Star Wars anymore. How many people loathed the prequels? How many people loved the prequels? The big difference is that it was unquestionably Lucas' creation, and everyone recognized or could at least respect that it was truly "his baby." Disney bought it, merchandised the hell out of it even more than Lucas, made a whole LOT more content that falls in all kinds of ranges of good to bad, but because it's not home-grown, it's a lot easier to slap the label of corporate product on it.
 

Popularity. The same way TSR did with 2E.
whatever edge 1e was supposed to have over 2e, I could easily do without

Never cared for devils or demons all that much and if renaming those is enough to fool the satanic panicers, then that is fine by me
 

I’m interested in why people are so down on the recent WotC products?

Planescape seems like a really solid set. I’m a massive fan of Golden Vault having run several of the adventures in it. I’m a player in Vecna now and we’re having a great time with the nostalgia appeal.

Is there an expectation that every single book lands well with everyone? I complained that I disliked Strixhaven and Witchlight but I recognize that other folks think Witchlight is one of the best campaign books. Why does someone making products that aren’t to a particular taste make them trash?
 

I’m interested in why people are so down on the recent WotC products?

Planescape seems like a really solid set. I’m a massive fan of Golden Vault having run several of the adventures in it. I’m a player in Vecna now and we’re having a great time with the nostalgia appeal.

Is there an expectation that every single book lands well with everyone? I complained that I disliked Strixhaven and Witchlight but I recognize that other folks think Witchlight is one of the best campaign books. Why does someone making products that aren’t to a particular taste make them trash?
Folks see any time and/or resources spent on something thats not of their interest as a waste. Paizo APs face this too. Anytime a campaign theme comes along there is always a group that immediately declares it crap becasue its not their preference. 🤷‍♂️
 

the sequel trilogy is 3 of the 4 top slots for box office revenue (plus Rogue 1).
yeah, with the first one living off borrowed / bought fame, and you can see the drop right there. From 900M for the first part of the trilogy to 600M for the second and 500M for the third to 200M for Solo.

The starting point was Lucas’ Star Wars, the end point was Disney’s doing. That is exactly what I am referring to, they did not manage the business / brand well
 

Obviously, that's subjective.
is it? Every release performing worse than the previous one at the box office, going from 900M for the first part of their trilogy to 200M for Solo does not feel all that subjective

Did not really look at viewer numbers of their series, but with The Acolyte being cancelled after one season and Skeleton Crew renewal being uncertain, they are not exactly doing great there either
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top