Mearls WTF?

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:21 pm

http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_1250.html

http://mearls.livejournal.com/80639.html

So I was linked to these articles by an EnWorld thread. Anyway, this is quite the contrast to bitching at players for quoting rulebooks. So what the hell changed? All I see on EnWorld is old school fappery.

Admittedly, these are seven years old, but still...

sake · Post by **sake** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:57 am

Choose one:

Power corrrupts and absolute power something something...

Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

Finkin · Post by **Finkin** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:56 am

The accused: whoever was making this kind of decision at TSR.

The accomplice: Gary Gygax, for writing this prime example of hack RPG creation. I don't know enough about the situation at TSR circa 1980 to make a call as who exactly is to blame. Maybe Gary had to crank this thing out under an insanely tight deadline. Maybe he jumped up on the table at a board meeting and demanding that this amazing module be published. I won't make a call either way, but his name is on the cover.

The crime: peddling crap on those who didn't know enough to call it crap.

The victim: RPGs in general.

Oh, the irony. Replace every occurrence of Gygax with Mearls and TSR with WotC and you basically have an indictment of everything that has ever had Mearls' name attached to it.

He can only dream that anything in his list of credits has the longevity or is ever as prolific as Keep on the Borderlands.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:17 am

Well, Keep on the Shadowfell is known as a legendary treasure trove of fail if that's the kind of immortality he was looking for. Though that's more Andy Collins and Bruce Cordell's baby.

ModelCitizen · Post by **ModelCitizen** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 6:34 am

That article about minis is dumb. If 3.5 Favored Enemy is a "mother may I" ability then anything is. The DM might not ever have you fight an evil outsider but it's not like he's allowed to put a cornugon on the board and say "nope, your Favored Enemy: Outsider (Evil) doesn't work right now." A Mother-May-I Favored Enemy would be if you had to describe exactly how you hit the cornugon harder and then the DM decided whether to give you your little +2.

Fuchs · Post by **Fuchs** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:02 am

Unless it's actually something else that is using an illusion to look like a cornugon.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:03 am

I wouldn't say that FE is a Mother May I, but it's definitely a lot more of a gamble than other abilities, so it feels like a MMI when you have to pick what to favour, at least at first.

ModelCitizen · Post by **ModelCitizen** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:51 am

Fuchs wrote:Unless it's actually something else that is using an illusion to look like a cornugon.

In 3e there is a 100% non-MTP answer to that: no bonus, unless the something else is also an Outsider(Evil). Likewise, if a cornugon uses an illusion to appear as dog (a regular Animal dog, assume you don't have FE: Animal) you still get your bonus even though you don't know it's an Outsider(Evil). It's not Mother May I but it's definitely kind of bad.

And unfortunately it can't be cleaned up, because to fix it you'd have to invoke the Knowledge rules for identifying creature types and those rules are just comic nonsense.

erik · Post by **erik** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:40 pm

Yah, Mother May I is when you have to beg for your ability to work at all, not for you to encounter the creature it works upon.

Now, with FE, often the onus may be upon the DM to remember the Ranger's Favored Enemy bonus since the ranger may have no way of knowing what he is spotting/tracking/damaging/etc. and that his bonus actually applies. In that sense, if the Ranger is constantly asking if he gets his bonus, it may feel like Mother May I.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:25 pm

Mearls wrote:This is where I think the basic model of GNS applies(...)

Why does my mind immediately reject any sentence or paragraph that start with this? No matter what follows it?

I'd argue that if you're playing D&D with a focus on investigation, stealth, or roleplay, and the players enjoy it, you've already moved outside the typical D&D paradigm as a group. My focus is on the average D&D group. IME, the typical D&D group sees those factors as fun ways to bridge combat, or interesting ways to earn tactical advantages in upcoming encounters, or a good way to lend emotional weight to a battle. Those factors are all very important (they're why D&D is popular and viable despite other game forms), but they are built around heroic action and adventure.

And this part seems to be a polar opposite of his design goals (the three pillars) in unifying D&D. Unless I remember the Three pillar part wrong (can't seem to find it right now)