D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked

OK on this "I would’ve much preferred the ability to adopt any role within the core 4 by giving players a big choice at level 1, an option that placed an overlay on every power you used or that gave you a new way to use them."
Basically have Source Specific Powers and less class powers. But I think combining that with having BIG differing stances to dynamically switch role might be a better idea so that your hero can adjust role to circumstance. I have to defend this NPC right now vs I have to take down the big bad right now vs I have to do minion cleaning right now, I am inspiring allies in my interesting way, who need it right now.

and the obligatory
Argghhhh on this. " I wanted classes to have different power acquisition schedules"

And thematic differences seemed to have been carried fine.

 

[Jay Verkuilen]

Right instead of thinking in terms of a "Spam Guard" keeping things more interesting you went there. ... sheesh

Mike Mearls himself said that 4E was influenced by video games. Cooldown is a mechanic used in video games to avoid players spamming the same power over and over and to generally simulate the issue of more powerful abilities being harder and limited. Being influenced by video games isn't inherently bad. D&D influenced a ton of video games and was itself derivative of war-games. Similarly the card game influence is quite clear. Games like MtG (or just old games like spades, hearts, bridge, etc.) force players to make explicit choices about which card to play in a particular point in the game. This makes tradeoffs explicit and is an inherent feature of the Encounter/Daily system. It puts the choice of what you'll do in a particular turn front and center.

Why play D&D when you can play Pac Man and have your character run around in a nonsensical maze eating treasure beads till you are awesome enough to turn the attack to the ghosts I mean monsters... move to the next maze and you have to level up almost always avoiding them

What's the point of all the hyperbole? It just decreases the signal-to-noise ratio.

 

[Garthanos]

Mike Mearls himself said that 4E was influenced by video games.

Mike Mearls also took jabs at the Warlord claiming they shouted lopped off body parts on... The assertion that Mearles hated or didnt understand the big picture of 4e is based on some of his faux pas.

Cooldown is a mechanic used in video games to avoid players spamming the same power over and over and to generally simulate the issue of more powerful abilities being harder and limited. Being influenced by video games isn't inherently bad. D&D influenced a ton of video games and was itself derivative of war-games.

I was discussing earlier how many fantasy and quasi-realistic combat concepts can be modelled well by encounter powers that really do not make nearly as much sense with the 5e short rest... but this too was a sticking point so 5e doesnt let a character pull off anything but very basic tricks or more of them every fight. Quite honestly that e-war assertions including this one hampered the hell out of 5e in my opinion. I resent the hell out of the trolls who influenced the game. So instead of getting a refreshed and rejuvenated edition that could honestly call 4e its ancestor we have them hiding 4e elements under the hood or ejecting them entirely.

What's the point of all the hyperbole? It just decreases the signal-to-noise ratio.

As far as I am concerned you brought it up. It was part of the entire e-war meme... and an easy lazy jab that applies to the entire game from the ground up.

We can talk about the effects and whether they were seen in video games is really really beside the point.

 

[Parmandur]

Mike Mearls also took jabs at the Warlord claiming they shouted lopped off body parts on... The assertion that Mearles hated or didnt understand the big picture of 4e is based on some of his faux pas.

I was discussing earlier how many fantasy and quasi-realistic combat concepts can be modelled well by encounter powers that really do not make nearly as much sense with the 5e short rest... but this too was a sticking point so 5e doesnt let a character pull off anything but very basic tricks or more of them every fight. Quite honestly that e-war assertions including this one hampered the hell out of 5e in my opinion. I resent the hell out of the trolls who influenced the game. So instead of getting a refreshed and rejuvenated edition that could honestly call 4e its ancestor we have them hiding 4e elements under the hood or ejecting them entirely.



As far as I am concerned you brought it up. It was part of the entire e-war meme... and an easy lazy jab that applies to the entire game from the ground up.

We can talk about the effects and whether they were seen in video games is really really beside the point.

Old arguments aside (which I did not participate in): we have the casual testimony of a 4E designer that there was a video game design influence, video game influence isn't a bad thing in se or at all really, and the similarities are out in the open for analysis.

Just because edition warriors used a given fact hurtfully in the past doesn't mean that it is not true. Nor even that it is bad. It just...is.

 

[Garthanos]

The Raise Dead ritual is available in heroic tier... level 8... I believe your examples are comparing action declarations of epic level characters and somehow claiming their ability to do that in epic tier makes them equally capable to a caster who can pull it off in heroic?? Huh?

I wasnt meaning my Martial Raise death to be quite Epic tier actually.
There is a bit of disconnect because of my long time house ruling perhaps.
I have since 1e moved Raise Dead so its a post name level ability ie paragon even mid paragon and the martial trick of wrestling death (3 days after the apparent death) fits paragon levels and since Epic has reached the point of heros in some cases travelling back from the realm of the dead on their own volition, well its a bit different.

 

[Garthanos]

O
Just because edition warriors used a given fact hurtfully in the past doesn't mean that it is not true. Nor even that it is bad. It just...is.

Again - One can talk about the effects and whether they are valuable and how they contributed to play or still do and I do not see oooh dude that came from a video game as actually very pertinent.

 

[Parmandur]

As a point of interest, it seems the game mechanic of a "cooldown" was introduced in the 1989 PC game MUD "Avalon: The Legend Lives" which is still being played on some servers...

 

[Parmandur]

Again - One can talk about the effects and whether they are valuable and how they contributed to play or still do and I do not see oooh dude that came from a video game as actually very pertinent.

As a value judgement, I absolutely agree. However, on the topic of "how could 4E have been different or received differently," H4ter rage focused on the video game inspired elements, and Mearls did discuss that in his recent 4E musings.

 

[Jester David]

Mike Mearls also took jabs at the Warlord claiming they shouted lopped off body parts on... The assertion that Mearles hated or didnt understand the big picture of 4e is based on some of his faux pas.

That’s a pretty authoritative statement regarding an offhand comment being spoken during a live podcast recording, that was in response to Crawford comparing the warlord to William Wallace in Braveheart.

Also... Mearls was there for the entirety of 4e. From it’s early days as Orcus to Essentials to its end. He was literally hired by WotC to work on 4e. I think he had a pretty good idea of its big picture, as well as it’s inspirations and design goals.
He just wasn’t in charge, so his ideas were overruled by the lead developer. It wasn’t his edition in the same way 5e is. Hence the question of what he would have done.

 

[Parmandur]

That’s a pretty authoritative statement regarding an offhand comment being spoken during a live podcast recording, that was in response to Crawford comparing the warlord to William Wallace in Braveheart.

Also... Mearls was there for the entirety of 4e. From it’s early days as Orcus to Essentials to its end. He was literally hired by WotC to work on 4e. I think he had a pretty good idea of its big picture, as well as it’s inspirations and design goals.
He just wasn’t in charge, so his ideas were overruled by the lead developer. It wasn’t his edition in the same way 5e is. Hence the question of what he would have done.

Based on what he has said on the topic, his "own" edition would be maybe a bit in between, really. With dice pooling mechanics.

 

[Imaro]

Nope incorrect 4e is very blatant about enabling taking the flavor text elements and wielding authorial power over them presenting them the way you like... it just encourages and provides a starting point (and yes we discuss how particular Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies fit into the DMs game world when they come up so it isn't some completely 1 sided thing without Player nor without DM involvement - its pretty much a part of that open flavoring aspect) , i go a step forward and use the players ideas about their origins to help seat elements of my game world... ie more player investment.

Heck murder hobos is partly a side effect of players who do not think in terms of the world or looking forward to their character within it or start from a point of estrangement like sociopaths.The game makes better players with these offerings as far as I am concerned.

The Fighters castle on the hill was a bad implementation of a good idea, because it railroaded player goals. So I am assuming Paragon Paths are left by the wayside too. ie pretty much leaving nothing for that fighter to look forward to nor encouraging DMs to think about either ie.



Ya got this part right its player empowering which makes it entirely different than a DM handing out a few late game boons at his infinite discretion.


No more than the 4e one it is well established the distinction between flavor/fiction and mechanics and frankly I find this utterly disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

The full extent of
"The DM might allow a player to select a boon for his or her character, subject to their approval."
WHEN yup I am certain at 20th level yeh that is providing aspiration and what are you going to do show them that bald list of these feat like items

4e was massively critiqued because it didnt bake in flavor 4e is positively rich with flexible fungible flavor compared to this after thought

- is pretty paltry nor do boons talk at all about nor provide any starting point for the fiction of making a development in the story driven by the player but rather treats them like handing out like treasure LOL sheesh.

4e HAD boons they were not Epic Destinies nor are 5es boons.

I like players defining their goals and these game features encourage them to think in terms of the future of their character (and as I said they are sometimes or even often adjusted to fit the narrative game world)

Yes you do see they are dramatically different and do not count as the same function at all... a player looking forward toward the storyline he invested in is entirely different from one who might be given "some minor power boost"" by the DM at really high level sheesh.

How do I use boons to accomplish what paragon paths and epic destinies ie the things I want to accomplish might be the question.

What I find disingenuous is to claim on the one hand 4e is fiction first... but on the other hand the fiction doesn;t matter and is easily disposable and/or malleable.