Mike Mearls' Legends and Lore: First Impressions

[NoWayJose]

I thought it would be interesting to discuss the overall direction, so far, of Mike Mearls' Legends and Lore articles.

My impression, so far, is that it's a good initial attempt to parlay with the community, yet it feels mostly one-way. There's no onpage comments or twitter- or facebook-like engagement. Feedback is elicited through a simple multiple choice. I'd like to see more nuanced polls, perhaps an 'Other' comments field, perhaps an Official Feedback thread. I don't know whether the restricted feedback is intentional or not, due to technical constraints or otherwise.

I'd love to see different kinds of polls about overall design philosophy and other 4E-isms that (for me) are just or more important than polls about rules. Perhaps polls that address systemic debates like simulationism, fiction first vs rules first, bird's eye view vs immersion, or whatever other big issues are shaping the D&D tent(s).

I'd love to read Mearls' comments about the poll results from the preceding article. Hopefully, he would have something interesting to say about the poll results, emphasing the relevance of that polling, assuming that the particular poll wasn't, in hindsite, rather obvious or superficial.

It would be interesting to see great polls with real feedback loops, where the results of one poll may shape a future direction, perhaps something truly community-driven like the D&D Creature Competitions. Or perhaps the polls are more like carrots leading us somewhere pre-determined.

I don't claim that Mike Mearls and WoTC are obligated to listen to any of us. I'm not expecting them to. I don't hate Mearls, and don't love or hate any edition of D&D. It's much too early to jump to any conclusions, and yet the first few articles are already setting a certain tone that is already drawing divides here on Enworld. First impressions can be important, especially if Legends and Lore is part of a WoTC PR strategy or social engagement.

I am very curious where Legends and Lore is going. Just not sure if it's getting off the right or wrong foot in terms of first impressions?

 

[Derulbaskul]

You're far too kind.

Legends & Lore is rubbish. It just an attempt to fill the gaping hole which is the DDi publishing schedule. This isn't about engaging the customer base; this is just about filling a hole.

If these articles were actually about engaging the customer base then:

1. they would be on messageboards and/or the other forms of social media; and
2. the polls wouldn't be so poorly designed as to be largely meaningless.

Chris Perkins's column, on the other hand, actually has some value. Mike should just come back to the boards if he wants to engage.

 

[MrMyth]

You're far too kind.

Legends & Lore is rubbish. It just an attempt to fill the gaping hole which is the DDi publishing schedule. This isn't about engaging the customer base; this is just about filling a hole.

Except it isn't part of DDI. It is free content on the website for everyone.

You are free to dislike the column, sure. For myself, I agree that the DM advice column is absolutely awesome. Legends and Lore... I find it interesting to take a look at some of these ideas, but it rarely 'wows' me in any way.

But I don't think it reasonable to completely dismiss it as filler, especially as filler for a product it isn't connected to in any way.

As for the original point... I would actually find it a less useful feature if it was simply a messageboard post or something similar. As it is, I think having it accessible on the website, with a link to a messageboard thread for discussion (as it has) is perfectly fine. It certainly has succeeded in getting people talking about it, in various places, and I think that is enough. We don't need Mike responding point by point to individual comments on the articles, honestly.

 

[NoWayJose]

As for the original point... I would actually find it a less useful feature if it was simply a messageboard post or something similar.

But that wasn't the point of the OP...

As it is, I think having it accessible on the website, with a link to a messageboard thread for discussion (as it has) is perfectly fine.

Where is that link? I've always looked for such a direct link, but unless I'm blind, I only see a relatively inconspicious 'Discuss' link that goes to the general D&D forum, which lists all the many subforums.

We don't need Mike responding point by point to individual comments on the articles, honestly.

Again, the OP never suggested a point-by-point response to individual comments.

 

[hayek]

I'm actually pretty surprised that he's dedicated his time to a weekly column. He's gotta stay pretty busy and would've guessed he'd commit to a monthly or bi-weekly column at most. It at least shows a major effort to reach out to fans and I appreciate that. I do wish he would discuss/comment on past poll results. They seem kind of pointless without a follow-up discussion on their implications.

I certainly don't think the piece is just filler. If they just wanted to fill space, they'd have made the author 'R&D staff' and passed around the reponsibility some. They wouldn't burden the Director of R&D (or whatever Mearls is) with a weekly column just to pad a publishing schedule.

 

[rogueattorney]

I think some of his observations and conclusions are way too simplistic.

In some ways his articles seem to be an apologia from a 4e designers to the players of previous editions, but doing it in a 4e setting with the polls is just odd and dissonant. The net effect reads like, "Hey guys, I like that old stuff, too, but as you can see our fans don't like it, so we're not actually going to do anything to win you back."

 

[MrMyth]

Where is that link? I've always looked for such a direct link, but unless I'm blind, I only see a relatively inconspicious 'Discuss' link that goes to the general D&D forum, which lists all the many subforums.

Good point - the Discuss link is the one I was referring to. It often links to a direct thread with most articles, but that only seems true for one or two of the Legends and Lore columns.

I do definitely agree that fixing that and helping create a more dynamic connection between the site and forums would be a good start.

Again, the OP never suggested a point-by-point response to individual comments.

Not specifically, but it was clearly about some sort of greater actual discussion with the community, and I don't think too much of that is needed. Perhaps to a small amount - commenting on the previous poll results, etc, stuff like that - but I find the current format more useful than I would find a page filled with user comments.

 

[Ourph]

Legends & Lore is rubbish.

This.

Listen, Mike, please for the love of god stop with the introspection and mulling over the history of D&D bit and WRITE SOMETHING I CAN USE IN MY 4e GAME!!!!

 

[Matt James]

This.

Listen, Mike, please for the love of god stop with the introspection and mulling over the history of D&D bit and WRITE SOMETHING I CAN USE IN MY 4e GAME!!!!

Introspection is important in developing quality products. What do you need written for your 4e game? Let me know. I am curious as to what you need right now.

 

[NoWayJose]

A new article today, "What's With the Polls?" Coincidence?