|
|
Post by Badasterysk on Jun 20, 2008 15:23:29 GMT -5
As my freind Kevin said "It's like they took all fun parts from World of Warcraft, and added them to D&D." This is enough to make me never want to play 4e. If I wanted to play WoW, I would play WoW. Thank God I'll always have my 2nd Edition and 3.0 books. |
|
|
|
Post by Deekin on Jun 20, 2008 16:04:25 GMT -5
As my freind Kevin said "It's like they took all fun parts from World of Warcraft, and added them to D&D." This is enough to make me never want to play 4e. If I wanted to play WoW, I would play WoW. Thank God I'll always have my 2nd Edition and 3.0 books. So, becouse D&D took some inspiration from a massively popular computer game, you never are going to play it? |
|
|
|
Post by TheZebraShakes™ on Jun 20, 2008 16:11:50 GMT -5
D&D needs to stop screwing around and quit being such a poser before someone gets hurt.
That's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by spiral on Jun 20, 2008 16:23:56 GMT -5
Who bought 4th Ed? Show of hands, can we have a vote, I'm curious? The 2nd Ed forums around the net are reporting a major upturn in traffic. I can understand it, when 4th came out, I thought, I'm not upgrading, I just want to play D&D and not be fleeced for new versions - which made me question even 3rd ed (though I have nothing specific against it, aside from the feats and munchkinism and grapple rules) ...
how do we make a vote? got 4t, getting 4th, sticking with 3rd, going back to 2nd..
|
|
|
|
Post by Badasterysk on Jun 20, 2008 16:24:38 GMT -5
So, becouse D&D took some inspiration from a massively popular computer game, you never are going to play it? Correct. I want to play an RPG, not a videogame on paper. I have many more reasons why I'll never play, but voicing those opinions would take longer than it took to read the 4e PHB. And I wish I had that time back. EDIT: Negative on the 4e purchase. |
|
|
|
Post by K Man on Jun 20, 2008 16:52:01 GMT -5
Bought 4th, as expressed in the earlier post. Regretting the purchase, may be offloading my books here soon (they do come in a handsome case!). I side with Bad Asterisk (Bad*) on this one, no videogames on paper. The graphics would blow.  |
|
|
|
Post by Wizard on Jun 20, 2008 17:07:08 GMT -5
I didn't buy 4e. I don't think I will; looking at the SRD didn't make me happy. I also blame the video-game feel of the game.
One mark of video games is simplicity. This is advantageous in a digital world that understands either 1 or 0 and nothing in between. Another mark is labels on everything---if you're thinking in formulaic terms, you need to be able to name everything. Hence "milestones" and "encounters."
But we don't really live that kind of life, nor do we think in those terms.
How many times have you finished a test and thought, "Wow, I sure am glad that encounter is over! I'll be able to use lesser divination again next period now!"?
I'm not saying that 3.5 is perfect. It's not. But it has a lot more room for customization, being analog rather than digital. This unavoidably makes things messier.
It's a tough balance game designers face; creating enough rules so that there's a framework for players vs. leaving room for reality to happen. I think 4e has missed the point---it annihilates areas of gameplay by substituting overly simple rules in their places. If the PHB doesn't have rules for underwater combat, it's not that hard to make your own. But if it does, and they're not very good, then players are deterred by the placeholder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicksy on Jun 20, 2008 17:25:34 GMT -5
Who bought 4th Ed? Show of hands, can we have a vote, I'm curious? The 2nd Ed forums around the net are reporting a major upturn in traffic. I can understand it, when 4th came out, I thought, I'm not upgrading, I just want to play D&D and not be fleeced for new versions - which made me question even 3rd ed (though I have nothing specific against it, aside from the feats and munchkinism and grapple rules) ... how do we make a vote? got 4t, getting 4th, sticking with 3rd, going back to 2nd.. I d/led a copy but havent made it past the first few chapters. I may delete them....no sense in me having them if i'm not going to play. |
|
|
|
Post by Lin on Jun 20, 2008 17:39:59 GMT -5
I really don't get the whole video game thing. 4e plays nothing like pong.
I mean, all games have mechanics, no matter the media. The source of inspiration of those mechanics is pretty irrelevant. What should matter is if those mechanics are successful in creating the desired gameplay experience. Honestly, I didn't find a single thing in my reading of the 4th edition Players Handbook that made me think "This is like a video game."
Just to use Wizard's points (because they are still on my screen), simplicity and formulaic progress don't make me think of video games. Taj Mahal uses a single, simple mechanic, calculates things in a formulaic manner and I can't think of any game that could be further removed from being a video game.
I mean, by this logic Worlds of Warcraft is a bad video game because it plays like a roleplaying game.
|
|
|
|
Post by VemuKhaham on Jun 20, 2008 18:21:07 GMT -5
If World of Warcraft plays like anything, it sure isn't like a roleplaying game. But that appears to be the problem of any RPG with MMO in front of it.
That's why they should never make MMOD&D. Or am I missing the point somewhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by spiral on Jun 20, 2008 18:26:21 GMT -5
You're missing the point.  If what I read into the D&D Insider website Deekin linked to is correct, Wizards think they see the demise of tabletop RPGs. They are gearing up for D&D being played online. Look at some of the software they have in the works. Clients for playing remotely.. and the 4th Ed rules seem very much designed to work better in that environment, from what I've heard, and from working in games I know what I'd do to make something work better in a client/server way - isolate stages of progression to make room for a protocol. A, B, C, handshake D, if E goto F, else back to B. Yes, 4th Ed is going to work very well on a computer, which might just be what Wizards are intending... |
|
|
|
Post by spiral on Jun 20, 2008 18:39:24 GMT -5
Is this true?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicksy on Jun 20, 2008 19:00:00 GMT -5
If World of Warcraft plays like anything, it sure isn't like a roleplaying game. But that appears to be the problem of any RPG with MMO in front of it. That's why they should never make MMOD&D. Or am I missing the point somewhere? It was already done It wasnt very good frankly as you needed a group before anything really happened. I couldnt honestly be bothered after playing the free 10 day subscription. |
|
|
|
Post by Lin on Jun 20, 2008 19:07:20 GMT -5
If World of Warcraft plays like anything, it sure isn't like a roleplaying game. That's exactly my point. Even though 90% of the basic mechanisms in WoW are directly taken from RPGs, it plays nothing like them. The gameplay experience of 4e D&D is going to be absolutely nothing like the gameplay experience of playing a video game, even if there are some similarities in the mechanics. |
|
|
|
Post by Deekin on Jun 21, 2008 2:37:55 GMT -5
It's moreso the 3.5. A lot of the game is about movement, tactical positioning, and generaly abusing the battlefield. That said, you don't need miniatures sold by wizards of the coast, just something to represent the monsters and the characters on the grid. I use legos and Dice. |
|
|
|
Post by spiral on Jun 21, 2008 14:48:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicksy on Jun 21, 2008 16:41:21 GMT -5
Yeah, he going to shift that lot, get the 4th ed books and weep a little....
|
|
|
|
Post by chunker on Jun 23, 2008 13:20:08 GMT -5
I haven't bought the books.
2 pennies from one who thinks 4e is just an opportunity to repackage and resell the hundred 3e supplements:
1) I see Barbarian and Scout aren't core classes. Does 4e give you the option to build a fighter who could access Rage or Skirmish (for example)? Or do you have to wait for them to publish a new class in a supplement?
2) Most of the advantages listed look like house rules (the skill system, Defense improving by level like in d20M, more feats, more ability bonuses). Is there anything you can do with 4e that you just couldn't do in 3e?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deekin on Jun 23, 2008 15:29:34 GMT -5
I haven't bought the books. 2 pennies from one who thinks 4e is just an opportunity to repackage and resell the hundred 3e supplements: 1) I see Barbarian and Scout aren't core classes. Does 4e give you the option to build a fighter who could access Rage or Skirmish (for example)? Or do you have to wait for them to publish a new class in a supplement? 2) Most of the advantages listed look like house rules (the skill system, Defense improving by level like in d20M, more feats, more ability bonuses). Is there anything you can do with 4e that you just couldn't do in 3e? 1. Ranger Killed scout and Took his stuff. Barbarians Key off the Primal Powersource, and thus are going to be in the PHB II. 2. Have the Math work at High and low levels. Run a game without magic without effecting the math. |
|
|
|
Post by VemuKhaham on Jun 23, 2008 15:57:09 GMT -5
Just curious, what do you mean by that? Cause I'm running one right now on these boards, and haven't even felt the need to bother about math. Isn't it so that if you just leave the magical classes and items and such out, you're good to go to run a magicless campaign in 3.5? What essential elements as you say does 4th provide for that?
|
|
