<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Interview: Mike Mearls Talks About D&amp;D Next</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php</link>
	<description>Monsters and Magic for D&#38;D Gamers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 05:25:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35786</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:54:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35786</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I like your interview Wolfgang, nice work. 

I often find myself getting excited about a new edition of D&amp;D. I&#039;m a 3.5 player, and I own Pathfinder, but not 4E. It always seems when I&#039;m reading about D&amp;D Next, that my enthusiasm quickly wanes. Is a mixture of several editions of D&amp;D really a better game? 

It&#039;s obvious to me that WOTC (or maybe Hasbro) only realized the horrifically bad mistake they made with 4E when their sales numbers slowed unexpectedly due to the unexpected fracturing the community. Fourth edition created a rift in the FRPG community like nothing else before, and it hurt not only Hasbro sales numbers but also the gaming community. As an entity, we have never really healed from the wound inflicted upon us by the release of 4E. And I&#039;m not saying anywhere here that 4th edition was not a good game - that&#039;s sort of the point - while 4E might have been a great game, it still caused a huge, permanant fracture of the FRPG community. 

This all leads me to think that the business that supports the RPG industry might have a flawed idea of what kind of growth model they should be using. Have executives looked at RPG sales and decided that they need to sell more product? We all know that RPGs are not a growth industry. Lots of extra books are published continuously, and it&#039;s both a blessing and a curse for the players. Is this more to support the hobby, or to support the publishers? 

I guess when you put all this together what I see is a solution that keeps a thing what it is, and introduces the new content as a compatible but stand alone product. Why call the new edition D&amp;D? There is only one answer: cashflow. And that&#039;s the WRONG answer! Why did WOTC not anticipate the rise of Pathfinder? It&#039;s because of that same line of thinking. That a new edition must be &quot;D&amp;D&quot; or people won&#039;t play it. Hogwash! 

So we as a community may never heal the wound of 4E. The wound could have been avoided if WOTC had imagined that a new edition could be called something other than D&amp;D and still be successful, as Pathfinder proves. To go back to the beginning of my post, I think &quot;What if it wasn&#039;t called D&amp;D?&quot; and most of my fears evaporate. That may not be strictly logical, but it&#039;s a fact. Imagine that 5E was not being called D&amp;D at all. Now ask yourself if the mechanics, miniatures, maps or monsters still matter as much to you. If WOTC &quot;got it right&quot;, or if maybe the only thing that matters is if it&#039;s a fun game? 

S]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like your interview Wolfgang, nice work. </p>
<p>I often find myself getting excited about a new edition of D&amp;D. I&#8217;m a 3.5 player, and I own Pathfinder, but not 4E. It always seems when I&#8217;m reading about D&amp;D Next, that my enthusiasm quickly wanes. Is a mixture of several editions of D&amp;D really a better game? </p>
<p>It&#8217;s obvious to me that WOTC (or maybe Hasbro) only realized the horrifically bad mistake they made with 4E when their sales numbers slowed unexpectedly due to the unexpected fracturing the community. Fourth edition created a rift in the FRPG community like nothing else before, and it hurt not only Hasbro sales numbers but also the gaming community. As an entity, we have never really healed from the wound inflicted upon us by the release of 4E. And I&#8217;m not saying anywhere here that 4th edition was not a good game &#8211; that&#8217;s sort of the point &#8211; while 4E might have been a great game, it still caused a huge, permanant fracture of the FRPG community. </p>
<p>This all leads me to think that the business that supports the RPG industry might have a flawed idea of what kind of growth model they should be using. Have executives looked at RPG sales and decided that they need to sell more product? We all know that RPGs are not a growth industry. Lots of extra books are published continuously, and it&#8217;s both a blessing and a curse for the players. Is this more to support the hobby, or to support the publishers? </p>
<p>I guess when you put all this together what I see is a solution that keeps a thing what it is, and introduces the new content as a compatible but stand alone product. Why call the new edition D&amp;D? There is only one answer: cashflow. And that&#8217;s the WRONG answer! Why did WOTC not anticipate the rise of Pathfinder? It&#8217;s because of that same line of thinking. That a new edition must be &#8220;D&amp;D&#8221; or people won&#8217;t play it. Hogwash! </p>
<p>So we as a community may never heal the wound of 4E. The wound could have been avoided if WOTC had imagined that a new edition could be called something other than D&amp;D and still be successful, as Pathfinder proves. To go back to the beginning of my post, I think &#8220;What if it wasn&#8217;t called D&amp;D?&#8221; and most of my fears evaporate. That may not be strictly logical, but it&#8217;s a fact. Imagine that 5E was not being called D&amp;D at all. Now ask yourself if the mechanics, miniatures, maps or monsters still matter as much to you. If WOTC &#8220;got it right&#8221;, or if maybe the only thing that matters is if it&#8217;s a fun game? </p>
<p>S</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brendan</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35726</link>
		<dc:creator>Brendan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2012 16:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35726</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I believe the designers expect the game to be playable with minis, just not to require them. So, if you like minis, use them! The speed rules etc look like they should coexist fine with minis to me, though I have not run the play test yet (planning to do so tonight).

For those that want to use minis, you might be interested in these high-def Caves of Chaos fan maps. It might be possible to print out battle maps with them.

http://www.theweem.com/2012/02/01/caves-of-chaos-reimagined-by-weem/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe the designers expect the game to be playable with minis, just not to require them. So, if you like minis, use them! The speed rules etc look like they should coexist fine with minis to me, though I have not run the play test yet (planning to do so tonight).</p>
<p>For those that want to use minis, you might be interested in these high-def Caves of Chaos fan maps. It might be possible to print out battle maps with them.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theweem.com/2012/02/01/caves-of-chaos-reimagined-by-weem/" rel="nofollow">http://www.theweem.com/2012/02/01/caves-of-chaos-reimagined-by-weem/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin S</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35721</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2012 03:50:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35721</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Wolfgang and Jason Thigpen:

Pathfinder probably has released more material than 4e (or possibly even 3.5) if you count all the adventures and setting material. However, there have been relatively few rules supplements beyond core (the two extra bestiaries, the Advanced Player&#039;s Guide, and the two Ultimate books so far). That&#039;s one of the reasons I like Pathfinder: it&#039;s easier to houserule the game when your potential ruleset is smaller.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Wolfgang and Jason Thigpen:</p>
<p>Pathfinder probably has released more material than 4e (or possibly even 3.5) if you count all the adventures and setting material. However, there have been relatively few rules supplements beyond core (the two extra bestiaries, the Advanced Player&#8217;s Guide, and the two Ultimate books so far). That&#8217;s one of the reasons I like Pathfinder: it&#8217;s easier to houserule the game when your potential ruleset is smaller.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thalmin</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35717</link>
		<dc:creator>thalmin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 21:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35717</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have run the playtest both with and without minis (and then back to with).
The rules work fine either way. (I personally had difficulty running the game without, but that is because I have used minis in my games for 30 years, so I am used to that &quot;crutch.&quot; I found myself reaching for the figs to help describe each battle situation, even though they weren&#039;t neccessary. Old habits and all that!)
And I agree with mordicai. MINIS ARE COOL!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have run the playtest both with and without minis (and then back to with).<br />
The rules work fine either way. (I personally had difficulty running the game without, but that is because I have used minis in my games for 30 years, so I am used to that &#8220;crutch.&#8221; I found myself reaching for the figs to help describe each battle situation, even though they weren&#8217;t neccessary. Old habits and all that!)<br />
And I agree with mordicai. MINIS ARE COOL!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mordicai</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35694</link>
		<dc:creator>mordicai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 18:43:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35694</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m prepping for my playtest of Caves of Chaos tomorrow...&amp; the thing that is killing me is that I AM a mini user-- I run a roleplaying heavy, rules light game but minis are COOL &amp; help everyone engage in combat, I find-- &amp; the rules call for like 18 rats (for real!) &amp; other rather outrageous clumps of monsters.  All those rats could be a swarm!  I like swarms!  That, &amp; too many of the humanoids are basically the same &quot;theme&quot;-- I like goblinoids of all stripes, but I&#039;m reskinning a bunch of them to be other monster races.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m prepping for my playtest of Caves of Chaos tomorrow&#8230;&amp; the thing that is killing me is that I AM a mini user&#8211; I run a roleplaying heavy, rules light game but minis are COOL &amp; help everyone engage in combat, I find&#8211; &amp; the rules call for like 18 rats (for real!) &amp; other rather outrageous clumps of monsters.  All those rats could be a swarm!  I like swarms!  That, &amp; too many of the humanoids are basically the same &#8220;theme&#8221;&#8211; I like goblinoids of all stripes, but I&#8217;m reskinning a bunch of them to be other monster races.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35671</link>
		<dc:creator>J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 13:10:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35671</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m a little disappointed that he didn&#039;t really answer your last question.  Nothing there really tells us why a Pathfinder Player would want to look at DDnext.

I agree that there is a LOT of material for Pathfinder (and I&#039;m not trying to start an edition wars thing here, 4E and PF both appeal to different kinds of gaming, and that&#039;s OK).  However, a LOT of the material for Pathfinder is less Rules and more roleplaying/ culture and Adventures.  

That&#039;s what I&#039;d like to see for DDnext.  Less rules and mini-boosts to buy and more background, adventures, and roleplaying.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a little disappointed that he didn&#8217;t really answer your last question.  Nothing there really tells us why a Pathfinder Player would want to look at DDnext.</p>
<p>I agree that there is a LOT of material for Pathfinder (and I&#8217;m not trying to start an edition wars thing here, 4E and PF both appeal to different kinds of gaming, and that&#8217;s OK).  However, a LOT of the material for Pathfinder is less Rules and more roleplaying/ culture and Adventures.  </p>
<p>That&#8217;s what I&#8217;d like to see for DDnext.  Less rules and mini-boosts to buy and more background, adventures, and roleplaying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alphastream</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35664</link>
		<dc:creator>Alphastream</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 05:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35664</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It would be a real shame if gamers never moved forward. While we should always expect a few gamers to stay behind and play older editions, there is so much terrific fun in new innovation. Going from AD&amp;D and Basic to later Basic versions and to 2E, going from 2E to 3E, from 3E to 4E (and even from 3E to &quot;3.75&quot;)... each has really provided gamers with excellent changes and experiences, while looking both at inward and outward influences. Sure, nothing is ever perfect, but that is true of the past as well. Diversity, change, new... I welcome that. 

I&#039;m sure I&#039;ll play OD&amp;D again when I&#039;m in my 60&#039;s, but I truly hope I&#039;m primarily playing D&amp;D version (insert a really large number here) that has advanced the science of tabletop RPGs over the course of the years. At the same time, I hope to see a bunch of other RPGs that provide varied experiences and create a vibrant industry. 

Thanks for the great interview. I&#039;m always so pleased that the major RPG companies have such tremendous people - intelligent, creative, kind, fun. It is so clear how much Mike Mearls and Erik Mona love the game and want to make it great for the fans. We can only win in the long run, especially if we manage to work together as a community.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be a real shame if gamers never moved forward. While we should always expect a few gamers to stay behind and play older editions, there is so much terrific fun in new innovation. Going from AD&amp;D and Basic to later Basic versions and to 2E, going from 2E to 3E, from 3E to 4E (and even from 3E to &#8220;3.75&#8243;)&#8230; each has really provided gamers with excellent changes and experiences, while looking both at inward and outward influences. Sure, nothing is ever perfect, but that is true of the past as well. Diversity, change, new&#8230; I welcome that. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure I&#8217;ll play OD&amp;D again when I&#8217;m in my 60&#8242;s, but I truly hope I&#8217;m primarily playing D&amp;D version (insert a really large number here) that has advanced the science of tabletop RPGs over the course of the years. At the same time, I hope to see a bunch of other RPGs that provide varied experiences and create a vibrant industry. </p>
<p>Thanks for the great interview. I&#8217;m always so pleased that the major RPG companies have such tremendous people &#8211; intelligent, creative, kind, fun. It is so clear how much Mike Mearls and Erik Mona love the game and want to make it great for the fans. We can only win in the long run, especially if we manage to work together as a community.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wolfgang</title>
		<link>http://www.koboldpress.com/k/front-page12578.php#comment-35660</link>
		<dc:creator>Wolfgang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 01:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/?p=12578#comment-35660</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I expect people will have a chance to make up their own minds in the coming weeks and months. I am happy it&#039;s in the public eye, and we&#039;ll largely leave the realm of pure speculation. Though as with any playtest, things will inevitably change between now and the publication of the final rules.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I expect people will have a chance to make up their own minds in the coming weeks and months. I am happy it&#8217;s in the public eye, and we&#8217;ll largely leave the realm of pure speculation. Though as with any playtest, things will inevitably change between now and the publication of the final rules.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
