D&D General Mike Mearls sits down with Ben from Questing Beast

[Yaarel]

Looking at Odyssey, I applaud the use of the abilities only (the bonuses not the superfluous scores).

The spell system simplifies. No more slots. There are only the small number of spells prepared. Casters can cast a prepared spell repeatedly, until it is Exhausted (refreshed out-of-combat), or lost (must be prepared again after a long rest).

The simpler spell casting feels more 'magical', and narratively immersive. A d20 check determines if the spell remains accessible, and allows for a natural 20 crit (surge) or a natural 1 fumble (mishap).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The spell system simplifies. No more slots. There are only the small number of spells prepared. Casters can cast a prepared spell repeatedly, until it is Exhausted (refreshed out-of-combat), or lost (must be prepared again after a long rest).

The simpler spell casting feels more 'magical', and narratively immersive. A d20 check determines if the spell remains accessible, and allows for a natural 20 crit (surge) or a natural 1 fumble (mishap).

This sounds very much like Shadowdark.

 

[Yaarel]

This sounds very much like Shadowdark.

I am less familiar with Shadowdark. I suspect something similar can work in 5e, by switching to spell points rather than slots, but using the short rest Warlock chassis for the amount of points. It allows repeatability while avoiding excess. Where the cost is the slot itself, so a Fireball costs 3 points. The numbers stay small and the math without trouble, and flavorfully representing the amount of energy and focus before fatigue.

In the interview, Mearls emphasizes the importance of narrative, rather than system mastery, and feels this where roleplaying is heading generally. He strives to find the sweetspot between gaming balance and rules simplicity, as well as the between tables for simulation detail and handwaive abstractions.

The benefit of all of this is focusing on which spells are going to flavor the character concept, narratively, similar to how a handful of superpowers flavor a superhero thematically.

 

[Malmuria]

Around 15:00, Ben brings up something interesting that I thought about often.

For context, I started with 3E, played a ton of 4E, life forced me to focus on other things and I got back with 5E in 2016 before splitting into the OSR and indie RPGs around 2020.

Around 2014, I was in the middle of a long break of RPGs. Yet, with the announcement of D&D Next I was reading news and keeping up with what was happening. I remember vividly tons of old-school players saying that D&D was finally going back to it's root after the high-abstraction of 4E and the high simulationism of 3E. It was my first contact with a huge crowd that still played older editions (2E, 1E, B/X, etc). I definitely remember what Ben describes, this so called call to victory by the old school players.

And now, a decade later, 5E is being torn apart from what seems to be a similar or adjacent crowd as being the antithesis of what an Old School game is. I don't know why it has became cool to naughty word on 5E. I do not like Wizards as a company and I'm done creatively with 5E, I've exhausted that design space. But it's clear to me that it's a well designed game that open the gates to so many new players.

Am I crazy? Is it anecdotal or others remember this shift too?

Yes. Knight at the Opera writes about it here: The New School, the Old School, and 5th Edition D&D

But I think in the interview Mearls also says that 5e design has moved away from OSR principles. And some of it was an awkward fit for OSR principles to begin with (things like doing perception checks, or cha-based checks). As Mearls describes, there's been something of a return to system-mastery over diegetic gameplay.

 

[Malmuria]

I thought 19:18 was interesting, in that he says that the new edition was driven by management, not desires, and specifically by 2020 trends, i.e. getting more players online. This seemed obvious from some of the playtests, when they really seemed to be designing for the ability to code the ruleset completely into a vtt.

Also, at 48:44 there is a cat

 

[Zardnaar]

Around 15:00, Ben brings up something interesting that I thought about often.

For context, I started with 3E, played a ton of 4E, life forced me to focus on other things and I got back with 5E in 2016 before splitting into the OSR and indie RPGs around 2020.

Around 2014, I was in the middle of a long break of RPGs. Yet, with the announcement of D&D Next I was reading news and keeping up with what was happening. I remember vividly tons of old-school players saying that D&D was finally going back to it's root after the high-abstraction of 4E and the high simulationism of 3E. It was my first contact with a huge crowd that still played older editions (2E, 1E, B/X, etc). I definitely remember what Ben describes, this so called call to victory by the old school players.

And now, a decade later, 5E is being torn apart from what seems to be a similar or adjacent crowd as being the antithesis of what an Old School game is. I don't know why it has became cool to naughty word on 5E. I do not like Wizards as a company and I'm done creatively with 5E, I've exhausted that design space. But it's clear to me that it's a well designed game that open the gates to so many new players.

Am I crazy? Is it anecdotal or others remember this shift too?

There's always been some people who were negative about 5E.

Ever rising sales kind of sidelined them. Eventually that peaked however and a suger rush with Covid. Several things happened.

1. Product quality kind of declined post 2019. Tashas was high powered optional stuff. Adventures were very mixed/mediocre.

2. Bookscan data indicated D&D had peaked.

3. Self inflicted wounds from WotC eg OGL debacle.

5.5 is also high powered, more complicated and probably aimed at existing players vs newer players. I suspect a lot of the complexity is for online play. 5E definitely OSR influenced, 5.5 more 3.5/4E.

 

[mamba]

I agree with most of the OSR that B/X is the best old school rulebase to iterate from, but I loved 1e and 2e too (played both for decades).

I do like 2e, but as a ruleset I want none of BX / 1e / 2e back. That is the part I do not like about the OSR much, they hew too close to them instead of creating a 2e+ with stuff we learned in the last 45 or so years

 

[mamba]

This sounds very much like Shadowdark.

yeah, he mentioned that as a good mechanic it has, not sure Odyssey using it too is set in stone though

 

[Yaarel]

yeah, he mentioned that as a good mechanic it has, not sure Odyssey using it too is set in stone though

When designing a monster statblock, one wants to focus on the thematic spells that are appropriate, and not worry about complicated mechanisms to cast them.

This casting simplification is doing something similar for character sheets.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I thought 19:18 was interesting, in that he says that the new edition was driven by management, not desires, and specifically by 2020 trends, i.e. getting more players online. This seemed obvious from some of the playtests, when they really seemed to be designing for the ability to code the ruleset completely into a vtt.

Also, at 48:44 there is a cat

You have no idea how much I would have loved it if WotC had simply said that in 2020.