D&D General Mike Mearls says control spells are ruining 5th Edition

[AnotherGuy]

Thanks for being so very informative.

I stand by my non informative statement

 

[AnotherGuy]

Oh man, i am getting nostalgic for 4E. Epic Destinies were surprisingly simple constructs and yet really worked well to sell their narrative and make you feel Epic.

Yeah fully agree. I have quite the appreciation for how the tiered system worked in 4e, how the progressive engine catered for that (including the use of minions) and its why I favour a system where the first few levels of 5e get traded out (when at high level) for passive benefits to accentuate something similar for 5e. That and it also reduces the clutter on the character sheet.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I think 4e D&D rewards skilful, intelligent players at all tiers of play, in a least two ways: skill and intelligence are needed to achieve the benefits of cooperation and synergies in combat situations; and skill and intelligence (and also imagination) are needed to fully engage with the fiction (via p 42 as the resolution guidelines), both in and out of combat.

Here's an example of the latter, from upper Epic tier:
This is the sort of thing that of course will play differently at different tables, But because 4e has a consistent, coherent framework for establishing costs (action economy, recovery or non-recovery of abilities within a common resource suite, sacrificing permanent items (or item-equivalent effects), etc) and DCs (the DC by level table); and because the fiction of tiers is pretty clear and other parts of the game (like Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies) reinforce that fiction, meaning that appropriate effects are also reasonably identifiable; the game facilitates rather than impedes a particular table reaching a consensus about how something like sealing the Abyss can, mechanically, be done.

One thing I like about them is that they are express ("in your face"). The PC is a demigod, or one of the Raven Queen's chief marshals, or - in the case of the chaos sorcerer PC in my play excerpt - an Emergent Primordial.

An emergent primordial can do more than just hang out at the tavern waiting for quests. They're the sort of being that might seal the Abyss!

This was great.
I assume that because grid movement was not a concern at it seems in the above play example you allowed leeway with how much area was covered via the move action?

 

[tetrasodium]

How can we say control spells are ruining 5E if we can't figure out what an unruined 5E looks like???

The OP wasn't exactly accurate with what mearls wrote. It was more of a well deserved thumping of an ugly hack that replaced something more elegant but more complex in past editions than a barb directed at control spells.

 

[pemerton]

This was great.
I assume that because grid movement was not a concern at it seems in the above play example you allowed leeway with how much area was covered via the move action?

In the sealing of the Abyss, movement by the characters was being measured on the grid, in accordance with the movement rules. But the expansion of the zone by way of the Arcana check and use of the Stretch Spell ability was not being tracked on the grid - this was a layer-wide effect.

In terms of how it fits into the rules, here are the relevant passages from the rulebooks:

From DMG pp 42, 72, 74:

Actions the Rules Don’t Cover
Your presence as the Dungeon Master is what makes D&D such a great game. You make it possible for the players to try anything they can imagine. That means it’s your job to resolve unusual actions when the players try them.

Use the “DM’s Best Friend”: This simple guideline helps you adjudicate any unusual situation: An especially favorable circumstance gives a +2 bonus to a check or an attack roll (or it gives combat advantage). A particularly unfavorable circumstance gives a –2 penalty.

Cast the Action as a Check: If a character tries an action that might fail, use a check to resolve it. To do that, you need to know what kind of check it is and what the DC is. . . .

The difference between a combat challenge and a skill challenge isn’t the presence or absence of physical risk, nor the presence or absence of attack rolls and damage rolls and power use. The difference is in how the encounter treats PC actions. . . .

It’s also a good idea to think about other options the characters might exercise and how these might influence the course of the challenge. Characters might have access to utility powers or rituals that can help them. These might allow special uses of skills, perhaps with a bonus.


From PHB p 259:

In a skill challenge, your goal is to accumulate a certain number of successful skill checks before rolling too many failures. Powers you use might give you bonuses on your checks, make some checks unnecessary, or otherwise help you through the challenge. . . .
Chapter 5 describes the sorts of things you can attempt with your skills in a skill challenge. . . . You might also use combat powers
and ability checks.​

You can see from the example how we interpreted and applied these rules at the table: for instance, in this climactic moment for the Drow, who from the beginning of play has had the goal of liberating the Drow from Lolth's rule, big sacrifices - like permanently expending powers, so that they are not recovered on a rest - can generate big effects.