First, thanks for being so active in responding to questions! Great AMA.
I’m also a long term gamer – picked it up with the red box back in 1978. I’ve played a lot of games (and I’m a Runequest nerd at heart), but I’m very happy to see the new edition. I just picked up the PHB and the MM to join a friend’s new campaign!
My question is about process… The playtest was fascinating. What feedback surprised you from it? What are some changes you all decided to make that you weren’t expecting?Biggest surprise – people loved complexity out of combat, and generally disliked it in combat. That ran counter to what we expected. I really thought we’d see a big call for a much fiddlier core combat system, but that never happened.
Unexpected change – I love the proficiency bonus, but there were some of us (including me!) who thought that people would not be happy with a single progression. The feedback showed us that people loved it. It was a happy surprise.Comment from discussion AMA: Mike Mearls, Co-Designer of D&D 5, Head of D&D R&D.
I’m also a long term gamer – picked it up with the red box back in 1978. I’ve played a lot of games (and I’m a Runequest nerd at heart), but I’m very happy to see the new edition. I just picked up the PHB and the MM to join a friend’s new campaign!
My question is about process… The playtest was fascinating. What feedback surprised you from it? What are some changes you all decided to make that you weren’t expecting?Biggest surprise – people loved complexity out of combat, and generally disliked it in combat. That ran counter to what we expected. I really thought we’d see a big call for a much fiddlier core combat system, but that never happened.
Unexpected change – I love the proficiency bonus, but there were some of us (including me!) who thought that people would not be happy with a single progression. The feedback showed us that people loved it. It was a happy surprise.Comment from discussion AMA: Mike Mearls, Co-Designer of D&D 5, Head of D&D R&D.