http://montecook.livejournal.com/251404.html

D&D Next just became more difficult to pull off...

Holy moly. You are not kidding. I am curious what this "difference of opinion" is and how it may affect the direction of D&D Next.

Mike Mearls posted about it on the WotC page here: http://wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=d ... /20120425a

He also announced public play-testing starting May 24th. (Last day of teaching for me!)

Yeah saw that after your initial post.

See how the Monte part was tiny but the "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" diversion was inserted with the big playtest announcement. I wonder if that was planned or moved up to draw attention away from Monte.

Paizo picking up Monte?

However this shakes out, I wish him luck - I have gotten more than ten years of enjoyment from the 3.X architecture that he helped create.

His presence on board 5e gave me what little hope that I had for the coming edition. With him gone.... *Sigh*

He is a solid designer. I even liked what he did with Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil - even though I didn't much like the original! (Loved Village of Homlett - ToEE just was not the same.)

The Auld Grump

Erik Mona has taken note of his leaving WotC on Facebook (which is cool). Monte is also a writer, and that's supposed to be Paizo's strong suit.

This seems related in the "WTF is Wizards thinking?" kind of way. I can see this causing some discussions to spring up around game tables for sure...

If it was a reprint of a bunch of the material I might understand. This is just the core three plus Tomb of Battle. The irony is that Tomb of Battle was an attempt at mixing 3.5 and 4e rules and yet is a huge fan favorite amongst 3.5 fans.

Don't the 3.5 fans have their core books already?

I was wondering if this all might be a ploy to get everyone talking even more about D&D Next. I mean big-deal-designer quits, playtest announced and now previous edition leak (which could get 3.5 interested players talking about the possibility of a new version that could work with their games).

Publicity-wise, it seems like all of this is awfully coincidental and definitely has us talking about it...

Oh ye gods... if my group gets wind of this then J & J will begin dreaming of a reprint of the Rules Cyclopedia....

The Auld Grump

I think that the 3.5 core rulebook reprint is something folded into the concept of 5E, which has been described as "the edition that will include all the previous editions" - thusly this move being more in line with the anniversary reprint of the AD&D 1e books. Yes, this could mean that a Rules Cyclopedia reprint could be on the horizon*.
However I also have the nagging feeling that it could lead to a situation so confused and potentially damaging that the military slang has a proper word for it: cluster#@£ç. Too much stuff competing for the same spot against each other... uurrgh.




* which I would buy in a heartbeat, as my own RC has been stolen years ago by a dim-witted rotten piece of slag, may his dice shatter in his hands.

Hey Monte, you should work with WorldWorksGames! We pay our staff with hopes and dreams...and peanuts! You'll lose a ton of weight working here AND you'll really hone that sense of being a desperate artist again...lol.

Seriously though, it was very likely an issue with something involving licensing or perhaps how the company was handling the nuts and bolts of rollout. Creative folk tend to work great together, unfortunately things can get a bit messy during the practicality of getting the product to market phase. Lots of opinions, lots of money, lots of headaches.