D&D 5E What do you want from Legends & Lore

Jeff Carlsen

Adventurer
Legends & Lore is the big weekly touch-base with what the design team is doing. Sometimes it's great, sometimes it's weak, but the one constant is that Mike Mearls always catches some flack for it. Fortunately, he has a fairly thick skin, but maybe we can help out.

What would you like to see from Legends & Lore that would make it a better part of the discussion and design process? What would make it more interesting?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Plaguescarred

D&D Playtester for WoTC since 2012
- Discuss more about modules that will incorporate some 4E design

- Discuss more on what is the Legacy system

- Discuss more on how Adventurer's Tiers Level will impact on Multiclassing and Prestige Path

- Share Survey results
 
Last edited:

MortalPlague

Adventurer
Sharing the survey results more frequently would be interesting, though I can see why he doesn't do it. It would influence those who haven't taken the surveys yet, or it could influence the opinions of those who haven't tried the playtest yet. Still, I would love the opportunity to see some of the numbers.

I'd also like to see more specifics. Mike always talks about broad, general topics, but it would be great to see more nitty-gritty of how the design becomes a game element, or how the different elements evolve over the process.
 

dd.stevenson

Super KY
Honestly I'd rather see a one page adventure posted each week w/ some new monster stats and ideas about how to run it in the DDN playtest. And then maybe a note down at the bottom about what's happened this week with the DDN design team.

I mean I guess there have been some good things to come out of the L&L column; but my sense is that the design process is in the muddled middle where there's not really great blogging material available every week.
 


Blackwarder

Adventurer
I would like mike to start each L&L with a brif description of what he is wearing :cool:

Jokes aside, I would much rather have either concrete information on what the design team is thinking with a couple of examples or a question to the community regarding a part of the design process.

But I would much rather have an ask-me-anything once a month.

Warder
 

Laser-like focus and candidness that leaves no room for interpretation.

EG

"Non-Combat, Conflict Resolution Systems are not D&D. Therefore, one will not be included in the Basic Core engine. As such, do not expect to see deployable resources for such a resolution system built into the classes. Roleplay the social conflict and do what you've always done with exploration elements of the game. That is the 'essential D&D experience.'

Its possible that we will work up a module for this in the future but this will not be at release. This module will contain the mechanical resolution system and class resources that interact with such a system."
 

JamesonCourage

Adventurer
I like specific goals. I loved when he used bullet points, and says "here's what we're thinking right now" for goals, or what, specifically, they'd like to see. I'm not a fan of them when it's very broad, or touches on a new concept without really explaining what it is, its implications, etc. Clarity is a big thing for what I'd like to see out of L&L in the future. As always, play what you like :)
 

avin

First Post
L&L should talk about electronic suport for Next, we'll have it out of the box?

Are they already planning iPad/Android support?

Are we going to be able to use it offline, at least in pads? Offline Monster Builder was a major turn down for my 4E campaign planning.
 

delericho

Legend
Before it was "Legends & Lore", the column was "Design and Development". And way back when that column started was also the time when it was at its best. Partly simply because it was new, partly because it was written by someone who was directly involved in the process (as opposed to Mike, who is more management-oriented). And partly because it talked quite a lot about the underlying theories, and mused about what made a better game (in general), rather than tackling the specifics and minutae of the upcoming edition.

IMO, of course.

L&L should talk about electronic suport for Next, we'll have it out of the box?

Are they already planning iPad/Android support?

Also, this.
 

variant

Adventurer
L&L should talk about electronic suport for Next, we'll have it out of the box?

Are they already planning iPad/Android support?

Are we going to be able to use it offline, at least in pads? Offline Monster Builder was a major turn down for my 4E campaign planning.

It would be nice if they could included a digital copy of the book with each print copy. I would also like to see smaller screen ereader support, maybe even epub.
 

darjr

I crit!
I'd like more about what motivates or inspires particular changes. I'd also like a rundown of changes between packets and an explanation of those changes. I'd also like more detailed guidance of what they want to see tested and even a discussion of what they are asking in the next survey and why.
 


Bluenose

Adventurer
It would be nice if they could included a digital copy of the book with each print copy. I would also like to see smaller screen ereader support, maybe even epub.

I don't know exactly what's involved in joining, but the Bits'n'Mortar scheme already does this for a range of publishers/stores. You buy the book, give the publisher your email, and a download link arrives. Sometimes before you get home with the book.
 


DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I know I in no way want them to share survey results, because the last thing we need is for people to see that "their D&D" is in fact not even CLOSE to being as popular as they think it is. Because we'd get nothing but an endless stream of posts from people saying "Well, if this is what people think D&D is, I'M OUT!"

If you keep thinking that how you play D&D is "right"... you're more likely to accept some changes if you can see other preferences of yours in the game. But as soon as you see obvious indications that you're "playing wrong" in the minds of most other gamers... you're more apt to just leave and never look back. More often just out of spite than any real hatred of the game itself. Which is not what ANYONE at WotC wants to see happen.

In this case... ignorance is bliss, people.
 

I'm A Banana

Potassium-Rich
Pie.
[MENTION=697]mearls[/MENTION], give me some dang pie!

[sblock]
I actually think controversy-sparking articles are a pretty good idea, so I am pro any L&L column that gets a passionate reaction from the unpleasable fanbase.[/sblock]
 

Sadrik

First Post
I would like them to take one topic and discuss the pros and cons of that topic and then at the end say you decide. Sometimes this may not be very closely tied to what is going on in their design process but it will elevate the discussion to talk about what the issues are. If you are nerdy enough to want to know what the design choices are that are going into D&D 5e then you likely are interested in reading about RPG tropes, distinctions, and options. I think this would also improve the ability to design because the design team could brainstorm more based on these, as it won't be as close as the rubber meeting the road.

If they wanted to include what is going on in the design process make it a little one paragraph blurb. Or use that as the springboard for the issues presented in the article. If the tone were made more as brainstorm rather than a hand down it might improve the fan reception. A certain amount of people simply will not like whatever is handed down in an article, if it is a brainstorm its hard to knock that.

So my vote is for less specifics and more theory, but presented in a collaborative discussion like format.
 


Markn

First Post
All I want is consistency. If there is an L&L article, then it should be written every week. We should be given advance warning when an article won't appear. WotC has a terrible habit of setting expectations and then falling short of them. Is a missed L&L article a big deal? No, but when a customer is accustomed to expect an article, and it doesn't arrive, it sets a perceived notion of failure in the customers eyes.

I think Mike's biggest problem right now is that he is discussing what is currently going on, which means he is unable to write an article during a time crunch since it can't be written in advance. I'd like to see the article morph a bit to encourage the reader be more a part of the R&D discussions. Perhaps something like this (this is just an example):

1st Monday of the month: Discuss a concept from a previous edition that seemed popular and perhaps may be what the design team is looking at. Solicit feedback and brainstorm.
2nd Monday of the month: Focus discussion on challenges R&D faces with aspects of D&D. For example talk about monster design challenges. Greater in depth knowledge about the challenges provides more transparency for players.
3rd Monday of the month: Mike provides playtest anecdotes. Gives concrete examples of how the rules are seen from R&D which allows readers to get more insight.
4th Monday of the month: In depth article about D&D Next developments over the past month. Talk about classes, design, next packet release, etc.

WotC has done a good job of soliciting feedback, but it would be nice if we could be included earlier in the design process. It might speed things up (though it may not)!
 

Dungeon Delver's Guide

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top