D&D 5E (2024) Mike Mearls explains why your boss monsters die too easily

[dave2008]

So, if you know, in your heart of hearts, that a particular design is actually bad--as in it will, objectively, result in problems at real tables, you KNOW that it will cause problems down the line--but you also know that it will sell super well for the next five years prior to folks getting sick of those problems...

....then you should always do that and damn the consequences?

I reject that school of thought.

As far as I can tell you are the only one suggesting that school of thought

 

[Zardnaar]

You're missing a major part of the 5e market, young people.

When my son was in 7th grade (about 6 years ago) he joined the D&D club, it was BY FAR the biggest club at his middle school. It was so big they had to get a bigger room for it, and there was even a wait list - with parents calling and begging to get their kids in. And it was co-ed, about 60-40. In high school, the D&D club is again the biggest club at the school and it's about 50-50 boy/girl (and I do mean big, over 40+ kids).

And they DON'T play other games. I suggested my son run a Savage a Worlds game to try something different, and it wasn't even considered.

I've talked to friends in other school districts with similarly aged kids. 5e is big there too.

I suspect the staying power of 5e is still quite large, considering how it has grabbed the young crowd.

Yeah iI've had people contacting me I knew in 90s asking about D&D for her kids. I can buy it locally and post it.

One group contacted me from my hometown on Facebook. They knew a player/friend I had 1995 circa. He recommended me for DMing lol. 1.5 hour drive hmmn.

Nephew aged 16 wanted to borrow parts of my collection and raid my CD collection. And the stereo to pkay it. Sister shot the stereo down (huge 90s subs loud).

 

[Zardnaar]

And I have seen enough complaints now that I don't actually think 5e will last. It had a good run. Folks have seen the cracks now, though, and they're growing tired of the ways that their preferences got majorly, majorly compromised on/about. Obviously the 4e fans felt that right out the gate, given how hostile 5e was and has been to anything that smells too much like 4e. But I've seen the old-school fans bitterly complaining about how difficult it is to run a survival game in 5e, I've seen the 3e fans bitterly complaining about how limited and restrictive the character options are or how weaksauce the skill system is, I've seen 2e fans bitterly complaining about how 5e has ruined their favorite settings.

It's no one single thing everyone rallies around. But I don't think the 5e compromise will last forever. Death by a thousand cuts, and folks exploring all that's on offer and feeling hungry for something more/different.

Internet magnifies negativity remember.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As far as I can tell you are the only one suggesting that school of thought

I'm not the one arguing that financial success is the one and only standard that ever matters.

 

[M_Natas]

I'm not the one arguing that financial success is the one and only standard that ever matters.

It is for publicly trade companies.
Like, WotC is killing the long term health of Magic the Gathering for short term profit. Yeah, they make a big buck now, but their player base is eroding and if that's gone, their Universe Beyond sets will also not sell anymore. But shareholder demand want a profit increase every quarter.

That's why you also layoff 10-20% of your workers, even from the most successful Branches of the company.

 

[Stalker0]

But consider the possibility that they did follow a decade worth of feedback, hence the 2024 rules we got.

They definately didn't listen to feedback on those hide rules.....woof!

 

[Eric V]

I'm not the one arguing that financial success is the one and only standard that ever matters.

It isn't, you're absolutely right.

I am not sure WotC, specifically, care all that much about any other standard, though...especially if it doesn't impact sales in a big way.

 

[pemerton]

I don't know, to me looser math just means it is harder to predict the outcome, that to me is the opposite of a DM being able to control things.

At a lot of tables, the GM doesn't control things by anticipating the maths. The GM controls things by intervening directly, fudging dice rolls or manipulating the fictional situation.

 

[Minigiant]

I doubt that, the first half of the playtest showed that they were more willing to experiment than they would have been if the 10 years of conservative feedback were a factor / existed. What killed it was somewhere between them getting cold feet and feedback to the UA. More the former though


it's what made me drop 5e, so there is that

At some point we have to put some blame of the community

Problems with D&D have been known for years.
They don't get fixed because large swathes of the community refuse to either

1. Let their old books go for possible, newer, non-compatible.better designed book
2. Share the design space with fans of other styles of D&D and allow for true official variant play rules

The "Boss monster die too easily" problem is fixable. Easily.

We won't let WOTC fix it and encourage designers who don't desire to fix it.

 

[pemerton]

And I have seen enough complaints now that I don't actually think 5e will last.

It had a good run. Folks have seen the cracks now, though, and they're growing tired of the ways that their preferences got majorly, majorly compromised on/about. Obviously the 4e fans felt that right out the gate, given how hostile 5e was and has been to anything that smells too much like 4e. But I've seen the old-school fans bitterly complaining about how difficult it is to run a survival game in 5e, I've seen the 3e fans bitterly complaining about how limited and restrictive the character options are or how weaksauce the skill system is, I've seen 2e fans bitterly complaining about how 5e has ruined their favorite settings.

It's no one single thing everyone rallies around. But I don't think the 5e compromise will last forever. Death by a thousand cuts, and folks exploring all that's on offer and feeling hungry for something more/different.

Upthread you've called for statistically valid surveys. Are these observations of yours statistically grounded? I'm not seeing what your evidence is. I mean, given that 5e has been around for 10 years, I assume that most 5e players are not fans of any of the earlier editions that you mention.

I'm not the one arguing that financial success is the one and only standard that ever matters.

So, if you know, in your heart of hearts, that a particular design is actually bad--as in it will, objectively, result in problems at real tables, you KNOW that it will cause problems down the line--but you also know that it will sell super well for the next five years prior to folks getting sick of those problems...

....then you should always do that and damn the consequences?

I reject that school of thought.

I find this a bit odd. We're not talking about a product that anyone relies on for their wellbeing, or that creates any sort of risk. WotC is not peddling suffering by selling a game where the encounter guidelines are (i) widely ignored and (ii) presuppose a fairly specific approach to play in order to work.

I mean, we're talking about rules for playing a game. And frankly, if I could come up with a game that would be wildly popular for 5 years I'd see that as a success. That's a lot of people enjoying my game! The fact that, after 5 years, it loses replay value doesn't seem like a very serious weakness, if (say) a million people enjoy it in the meantime.

WotC aren't under any sort of duty to produce a game that you would regard as good, or that will solve the problems occurring at any particular table.