Monte's L&L columns

[Jeff Carlsen]

The concept of the game designer needing a rules lawyer is a common pattern in all design work. Web designers and web developers, architects and engineers.

Their isn't a strong separation between the two, and good designers are also developers and vice-verse. But, in general, individuals tend to be better at one side or the other. It's another reason for having a design team.

 

[the Jester]

I heard many rules designed by Monte didn't pass the internal playtest and were wiped out. Monte didn't like it and decided to leave.

Nevertheless, it is very bad signal for PR of Next.

[MENTION=83445]ShadoWWW[/MENTION]- By "heard" do you mean "I made this up", or do you have an actual citable source?

 

[Gadget]

Any way you look at it, it is definitely not good news when your head designer leaves a project (even if it is only a problem of perception, which it is not, that is still bad). I've never been a huge Monte fan, but I've never hated him either. There was definitely a vibe of 'We're getting the band back together' when they announced that they had hired him on to be the head designer, feeding in to the feeling that they were taking elements of all editions to distil them down to a super D&D for D&DN. That feeling has taken a blow with his departure.

However, Iosue above makes some good points. While some some people here were very excited about Monte being back, it was not merely the 4vengers (a new term I have discovered this week) that expressed some concerns; and it was certainly not the 4e folks alone that were ragging on his L&L columns. He was getting it from all corners. Particularly the OSR crowd. Personally, when reading his columns I felt like he had just stepped out of a time-warp from 2003: he just did not give the impression that he knew what the big issues were in the RPG community (particularly the D&D community) for the past 10 years, though I'm sure that's just an impression and not the truth of the matter.

What I find ironic is all the people who are now coming out of the woodwork and expressing doom and gloom, naming him a folk hero who has been driven into Sherwood Forrest by the evil Sheriff of WOTC and his vile henchmen, the 4ventures, when some of the same crowd was just as critical of his L&L stuff as anyone else.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

This used to be what being a DM meant. Perhaps we should learn a lesson from game designers, not worry so much about rules minutae and just have a good time. You are only "stuck" with whatever you let yourself be stuck with.

Some people are better at house rules than others. I make them when it seems impossible to avoid. But my experience with poor house rules that DMs thought were excellent makes me wary of implementing any. Every DM that had horrible house rules that only made the game worse thought he/she was a genius for coming up with them and that they were the best thing since sliced bread.

If I knew a rule had been tried by the entire staff at WOTC and playtested in all of their games for a while and that they jointly agreed that it made the game better, I'd probably add it. But having read many R&D blogs, twittter feeds, and posts....most of the designers implement their own house rules and play with them forever without ever considering making them core. Mainly, because the environment over there is that there should be NO changes to the core rules ever.

 

[Incenjucar]

Sometimes I think it would be nice if all of them were forced to play at least one game a week with no house rules or fiddling at all just to see the problems the rest of us do and actually work to correct them...instead of quietly correcting them in all of their games but never passing the idea on to the rest of us.

That would be fantastic. 4E was certainly plagued by them rarely genuinely playing by the rules they made, with the whole feat taxes thing and epic level play. But at the least, having someone whose purpose is to be a fact filter, on the editing team (because oh man do they need someone to look at articles before they're posted), who is intimately familiar with what is being said, and doesn't have their heads in the design clouds.

 

[avin]

I don't think it has to do with L&L columns.

When I read his announcement looked like "I love to work with that guys, but we are looking into different directions".

And then, a day after that, there was a blog talking about Healing Surges...

 

[ExploderWizard]

Some people are better at house rules than others. I make them when it seems impossible to avoid. But my experience with poor house rules that DMs thought were excellent makes me wary of implementing any. Every DM that had horrible house rules that only made the game worse thought he/she was a genius for coming up with them and that they were the best thing since sliced bread.

This sounds more like "my precious ideas" than house rules. House rules are adopted by the entire group. Bad DMing has nothing to do with actual house rules.

If I knew a rule had been tried by the entire staff at WOTC and playtested in all of their games for a while and that they jointly agreed that it made the game better, I'd probably add it. But having read many R&D blogs, twittter feeds, and posts....most of the designers implement their own house rules and play with them forever without ever considering making them core. Mainly, because the environment over there is that there should be NO changes to the core rules ever.

If I like an idea then I might want to play around with it. What game designers do at their own games doesn't serve as any kind of guarantee that we would enjoy the same tweaks at our table.

 

[Olive]

I don't think it has to do with L&L columns.

When I read his announcement looked like "I love to work with that guys, but we are looking into different directions".

And then, a day after that, there was a blog talking about Healing Surges...

I don't think his leaving is a direct result of the columns either. But I wanted to get people's opinions on them.

 

[P1NBACK]

Personally, when reading his columns I felt like he had just stepped out of a time-warp from 2003: he just did not give the impression that he knew what the big issues were in the RPG community (particularly the D&D community) for the past 10 years, though I'm sure that's just an impression and not the truth of the matter.

Holy ! That's incredible. I said this same thing about Monte when he published his "Nod to Realism" article back in December of 2011.

 

[mcintma]

I don't think it has to do with L&L columns.

When I read his announcement looked like "I love to work with that guys, but we are looking into different directions".

And then, a day after that, there was a blog talking about Healing Surges...

LOL I noticed that as well.

Monte being brought in was the thing that got me most hyped about 5e, and a return to proper playtesting and D&D's thematic roots being WOTC's plan. Now, it suddenly feels like we're back with 'the guys who brought you 4e' .. great news for 4e fans I s'pose.

I'll try out the playtest, but I'm now thinking 5e won't be for me.