Mike Mearls is a Genius

[Corinth]

Mike Mearls made a very smart, insightful and useful observation in his LJ today. (You can find the post here.) This is a post about the "core story" of D&D, and how that can (and should) influence both the design of supplements as well as actual play.

 

[MadMaxim]

Well, that certainly got me thinking about my current Eberron campaign in a different way...

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

A very good link. Thanks!

I also thought about equating Eberron's core story to Star Wars, but in retrospect Shadowrun is a much more apt comparison.

(Only a piece of the good reading at the link...)

 

[arwink]

Personally, I just equated Eberron to Indiana Jones. And in the next campaign, it'll be equated to the Three Musketeers.

While I agree that Eberron lacks a fundamental core story, at the same time it loads up the first few chapters with everything you need to overlay your own core story on top of the setting.

 

[A'koss]

I make a point of reading Mike's LJ because every once in a while he offers up some real insight into the industry and game design (His Iron Heroes Design Diaries are also good for this). Some of these articles have certainly made me take a harder look at my own homebrew setting and adventure design. And I've definitely had more than a couple of "Ahh, yesss..." moments along the way in thinking on how they could be improved. Except in naming conventions... never in naming conventions.

 

[DaveMage]

A very good link. Thanks!

Ditto.

You know, this mearls guy should write gaming books...

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

While I agree that Eberron lacks a fundamental core story, at the same time it loads up the first few chapters with everything you need to overlay your own core story on top of the setting.

WOTC's strategy may very well be to provide a setting without a core story, but that would be a strategy that has yet to prove successful. (I think that's Mike's point.)

 

[arwink]

WOTC's strategy may very well be to provide a setting without a core story, but that would be a strategy that has yet to prove successful. (I think that's Mike's point.)

Probably true. On the other hand, I found the absence of a core story in eberron attracted players to the setting that otherwise aren't inclined to swing with the core story of most DnD campaigns. My Eberron group consists of folks that had long ago abandoned DnD for other systems (Feng Shui, Shadowrun, etc) who were called back by the possibility of a campaign system they could insert their own take on how the game works.

Did WotC really need a new campaign world that replayed the old Core Stories? They have both FR and Grayhawk to handle that, and another variant on both probably isn't necessary. Eberron may not be clear about what kind of stories they're expecting to be told there, but that lack of clarity can become part of its strength.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Did WotC really need a new campaign world that replayed the old Core Stories? They have both FR and Grayhawk to handle that, and another variant on both probably isn't necessary.

No, they don't need another campaign world to replay the old stories. Which is why Ryan and Mike are left questioning. If Eberron is going to be successful (in the mold of GH and FR) then it would seem that it would have to replace one of them.

Eberron may not be clear about what kind of stories they're expecting to be told there, but that lack of clarity can become part of its strength.

The only response to that is, "We'll see!"

I don't have a read on it one way or the other except to say that it is a new approach.

 

[Celebrim]

An excellently written argument. If we were going to develop a library of writing for people who aspire to turn RPG's into an art form to think about, this essay would have to not only be in there, but displayed promenently.

Mearls clearly explains something that I had noticed before, but wasn't able to elucidate - not every setting no matter how well crafted is gameable. I'd figured that out, probably alot of people had, but this is the first time I've seen someone been able to explain it by a general principal.