Thanks to a thread over at TBP, I was able to find some posts by WotC staffer Mike Mearls over on their forums.

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14491016#post14491016http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14491016#post14491016

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14450767#post14450767

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14456843#post14456843

Salient points for me:

"First, the cards are not a system, but I suspect you're talking about the quest mechanic anyway. The cards have nothing to do with the mechanics of how a quest work, just like paper and pencil don't determine how hit points work. They are tools used to implement a mechanic, but not a mechanic. You can use the mechanic without those tools.

Second, what's to stop the DM from asking the players to create quests?"

"In 4e, we have mechanics that have that potential: allow you players to make up their own quests."

"Not every DM needs this mechanic, and not every DM who uses this mechanic needs to use cards to represent quests. We have no plans to produce quest cards or make them a standard part of D&D, and the adventures I've worked on do not include them."

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai"Not every DM needs this mechanic, and not every DM who uses this mechanic needs to use cards to represent quests. We have no plans to produce quest cards or make them a standard part of D&D, and the adventures I've worked on do not include them."

Thanks for clearing that up.

Not that anyone in the original thread claimed DMs would be forced to use cards to represent quests.

Can you link to the part where Mearls says the 4E rules set will facilitate sandbox play better than other editions of D&D?

I was pleasantly surprised by some of the statements quoted on rpg.net.

There may be a confusion of perception at the root of a lot of the strife about 4E. According to Mearls, the 4E rules remain the toolbox they used to be in earlier editions, not a set of laws chiselled in stone.

Thing is: It's as the latter, not as the former, as which they are celebrated by so many of the 4E fanboiz. What Mearls seems to intend as helpful suggestions for newb GMs, people treat as the prescriptions of a BTB Forge game.

Quote from: HaffrungNot that anyone in the original thread claimed DMs would be forced to use cards to represent quests.

No, they just repeatedly spoke as if it weren't entirely optional and ignored attempts to get them to admit that this was the case.

Quote from: HaffrungCan you link to the part where Mearls says the 4E rules set will facilitate sandbox play better than other editions of D&D?

No. How could I when no editon of D&D facilitates sandbox play than any other?

Seanchai

Said it before I'll keep saying.  I haven't seen anyting yet about 4th edition that has thrown me off.  It all looks like fun.  Different, from D20.  But a fun game all on it's own.  For me that's a plus.  I'm generally unhappy with current D20 for the most part.  4th ed looks like a fun new foray into the world of fantasy RPG's.  High adventure with no pretense that it's anything but a video game RPG.  - Fan-fucking-tastic.

I was wondering that those Mearls comments would make their way over here...

As far as I'm concerned his comments have reaffirmed my mostly optimistic stance on 4e. I'm not outright positive about it because it's not the product of a single man, but this gives me hope that the final product is shaping up into something that will hit the right notes: give players even more options while simultaneously making the game easier to run.

Seanchai gets bonus points for most hilarious title in a while.

I found a transcript on ENWorld with some interesting things from Mearls. There are all quotes from him:

"you ask if we're making a 4e a game that gamers want, or a game that I want. Well, I'd ask you the same question: do you want us to make a game that gamers want, or do you want us to make a game that you want?"

"Roles have no mechanics attached to them. They simply serve to inform players about a class and help people make clear, understandable choices."

"We are never going to make D&D more complicated than it needs to be. Roleplaying is not some sacred hobby that requires a minimum mental or creative requirement. There are few enough outlets for creativity in the world that I'd never stoop to make D&D less accessible.

The core of D&D is roleplay and the DM as creator/judge/actor/storyteller. Those two tools are the advantage that we have over every other form of game out there. They are awesome advantages, powerful enough to keep D&D going for over 30 years. We'd be insanely stupid to get rid of them or de-emphasize them."

All in all, this continues to make me feel enthusiastic about the upcoming game.

Quote from: architect.zerothis gives me hope that the final product is shaping up into something that will hit the right notes: give players even more options while simultaneously making the game easier to run.

I'm with you but I still want easier combats to run and (this may seem contradictory) I wish they had found a way to change the way armors work.

I will also be very curious to see how tied the rules are with physical representation (maps, minis of any sorts).

I can't wait until we hear more on the mechanics proper!

Quote from: architect.zeroI'm not outright positive about it because it's not the product of a single man, but this gives me hope that the final product is shaping up into something that will hit the right notes...

In no way am I saying this applies to you, but I think this is a good point and thread to say that I'm no more for unbridled enthusiasm than I am for all the negativity. We haven't seen the whole game yet - only bits and pieces. So I'm with you - cautious optimism.

Seanchai

I take this as a snipe from Mearls @ the PR strategy.

I know I've wavered along the way but at the moment I'm cautiously optimistic too. Actually, fuck it, Mearls is saying the things I want to hear about roles, campaign settings and ease of play.

hAVE YOU HEARD THAT PODCAST WITH cHRIS pERKINS ABOUT 4e Forgotten Realms ?

On RPGnet they're still goin' mental about Golden Wyvern Adept - change that broken record

I suspect that once 4E is released half of the controversies we've been discussing so far will seem like utter irrelevancies, with no basis in reality, while half the stuff which will be controversial after 4E comes out will be things we currently have no idea about.

Quote from: SettembriniI take this as a snipe from Mearls @ the PR strategy.

If you're going to have me on your ignore list, at least have the decency to ignore me (especially if you make a public display of putting me there).

Seanchai

Quote from: SeanchaiWe haven't seen the whole game yet - only bits and pieces.

And that, folks, is the key.

We are like the proverbial blind men trying to describe an elephant when each of us can only sense, through sub-optimal faculties, a very small set of a much larger whole.

This isn't a new phenomenon.  Just go and dig up the old usenet discussions surrounding 3e, forget any other example from countless sea-change events in other fields.

Quote from: architect.zeroAnd that, folks, is the key.

We are like the proverbial blind men trying to describe an elephant when each of us can only sense, through sub-optimal faculties, a very small set of a much larger whole.

This isn't a new phenomenon.  Just go and dig up the old usenet discussions surrounding 3e, forget any other example from countless sea-change events in other fields.

"An elephant is warm and squishy".