MM5: Design Article

[Shade]

Great article!

It's good to know that WotC listened to the negative feedback from MMIV, and it also seems to confirm that the complaints on these boards regarding it weren't just a "vocal minority" as many claimed.

MMV is great. It has l337 xillz!

 

[WhatGravitas]

Great article!

Yep. It's fun (and informative) to get such insights into the design process of books. I also liked it with the MIC - these articles are my personal highlights on the Wizards-site, right now, though I miss the Monster Makeovers by Mearls...

I think such articles should become something akin to a weekly column - Monte with his design diaries and WotC's Magic website with their "making magic"-columns are a good example how to design an engaging/informative website.

 

[the Jester]

Well, imho, they did MM5 right. It might be the second best monster book, after the original MM, in 3.5. I even like the classed monsters- this time, they did it right!

 

[Woas]

As I read the article, I kept thinking back at the big articles being written on the Magic: The Gathering main website several years back (just around the Onslaught set I believe) about the Color Pie and new approach to design and development that was going on.

Now we have a Monster Pie... or rather Bulls-Eye for the development of new monsters. And I wouldn't be surprised if this system of design & development did not extend to other areas of D&D at the WotC office. Which isn't a bad thing really. In fact I'm surprised this sort of development wasn't incorporated earlier.