Seen a few people ask why race rather than class provides ability bonuses – ideas in D&D 5 was to make pathing as easy as possible for new players. Races are meant to be very accessible/pop culture driven. They then bridge into class via stat bonus, making that choice easier.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 25, 2018

Sub-races serve two purposes – give races more flexibility without adding too much conceptual complexity. They also are a convenient place to plug in elements needed for settings – I adore how @HellcowKeith used them for dragonmarks in Wayfarers Guide to Eberron.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 25, 2018

Can’t believe it took me until 2018 to realize that the Circle of Eight as a cabal of eight wizards was a post-Gygax addition to Greyhawk. This changes how I think of the setting in a fundamental manner.

Yes, I’m a nerd. Carry on.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 29, 2018

How does it change your thinking on the setting? Reinforces idea of GH’s powerful figures as independent figures, no “good guy supergroup” to fix things

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 29, 2018

Is that better than the idea that it’s some guy’s home campaign filled with all of his PCs and NPCs? I think that’s what makes it fun – you have all these high level, world-shaking adventurers mucking with everything, alternately competing and allying, and so on. Makes for a dynamic we don’t have anywhere else.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 30, 2018

Grehawk, I don’t put much stock into anything past the 83 box set. In fact, I find the original settings more enjoyable without all the later meta plot changes Agreed

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 29, 2018

Yes would like a more full explanation please Michael Originally it was the Citadel of Eight, Mordenkainen and his trusted lieutenants. AKA Gary’s other characters. I much prefer the idea of GH’s mightiest NPCs more as rivals than a wizardly Justice League. Fits GH’s flavor better IMO.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 29, 2018

Was it introduced by Carl Sargent during the From the Ashes period? Around that time, might be a little bit before. Definitely a key part of the City of Greyhawk boxed set.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) September 30, 2018

#dragonheist hits game stores on the 7th. How about some early development sketches? A lot of these were made during the initial story concept. Some got picked up, changed, or discarded. But they were all fun to do. #dnd #WotCStaff Lets start with everyones fave beholder: pic.twitter.com/0ZZZG8Afre

— Shawn G. Wood (@thesgw) August 30, 2018

And his crew: pic.twitter.com/cXeRu13fAa

— Shawn G. Wood (@thesgw) August 30, 2018

We liked the idea of a sycophant type. Lets explore him more. Maybe put him under constant vigilance. pic.twitter.com/kisSvQpL4Y

— Shawn G. Wood (@thesgw) August 30, 2018

Still tinkering with TWF, still deep in the "add complexity 'til it breaks" phase. Next phase will be "cut back 'til it works." So, here's a slightly new approach:

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

I still like the idea of two weapons being the path of versatility at the cost of falling a little short compared to other options, so here’s what I have. When you use TWF you pick one of three modes: 1. Defense – +1 AC, attack as normal with one weapon.
2. Flurry – Make +1 extra attack but at a penalty
3. Focus Fire – attack as normal, but add off-hand weapon damage die to primary attack damage on all attacks

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

This is pretty sprawling, but at this stage in a design you’re just trying to figure out if the concept is distinct, fun, and flavorful. Basically – is there a chunk of people who see that and think, “That’s perfect for the character I want to play.” As it happens, I have two characters who dual wield in my campaign, so we'll see how this works. I think I'm done tinkering for now.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Mike, love what you’re tinkering with here, but I have a Meta question.

Say you land on something the community and WoTC staff agree is a winner; how does it get implemented?

“Option” in a future supplement? Errata? Another vehicle? Not likely a PHB change (as stated w/ Ranger) Most likely an optional rules module in a future product.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Any thoughts on allowing an off-hand dagger with a non-light main weapon? I like the image of the swashbuckler with a rapier and a parrying dagger Considering it – solving for two short swords first, then will poke at other cases

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

To me, two weapon fighting should be about flatening the bell curve. You attack more often. You miss more, you hit more. Attack penalties have always felt a bit off to me. This is an area where I envy video games, because you could easily imagine a debuff that triggers when you hit; if you miss you just follow up without penalty and get that consistency, if you hit you might want to ease off TWF for a moment as debuff cools down.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

I've always felt I am a halfling (hobbit really) at heart. I love food, friends, and a good tale by a cozy fire… and unexpected guests are ANNOYING but welcome nonetheless. Which fantasy race are you, and why?

— Chris Lindsay aka Mirt the Moneylender (@Onnatryx) September 7, 2018

Absolutely!!!

— Chris Lindsay aka Mirt the Moneylender (@Onnatryx) September 7, 2018

Literal manic pixie I love you just the way you are Vivka.

— Chris Lindsay aka Mirt the Moneylender (@Onnatryx) September 7, 2018