But those criers were wrong, its not that compatibile with MMOs, you can't play 4e in real time- there are too many reactions and forced movement to make it work. I'm going to ignore this thread now because I think it's a thinly disguised edition war.
And you would be incredibly wrong on that "thinly disguised edition war".
I'd just like to see a computer game using the rules. I disagree that you can't do it in real time. NWN works in real time after all. Modifications would have to be made to the rules of course but I felt that 4th ed would need less modifications than other editions have needed.I'd rather see a turn based game in the vein of Temple of Elemental Evil that Troika released in 2003
QFT, I thought ToEE was tremendously underrated, and honestly there hasn't been a version of D&D yet that was more compatible for conversion into a CRPG than 4th Ed. Oh and if you want to know what the MMO would look like, then just take a look at CoH/CoV. Reskin those games to a D&D setting and re-flavor powers to be D&D powers and viola, 4th Ed MMO. Prolly could even get Cryptic to work on it if WoTC asked real nice. My 2 cents.
Uh huh. And you have some kind of info on that or just saying it because you don't want there to be one?
Oh, I was responding to the Star Wars: The Old Republic question.
No way I could tell you whether or not there's going to be a 4th ed. computer game. Heh.
Not to mention that KOTOR didn't use the d20 Star Wars system. It used its own d20 system.
Oh, I was responding to the Star Wars: The Old Republic question.
No way I could tell you whether or not there's going to be a 4th ed. computer game. Heh.
Not to mention that KOTOR didn't use the d20 Star Wars system. It used its own d20 system.
It's based on the d20 system though and I liked how it worked. I hope the Old Republic will follow a similar model.
Secondly, please, by all that's holy, keep Cryptic and NCSoft AWAY from D&D. CoH (and most of their other MMOs) are boring Korean-based grindfests. I hated most of their MMOs, though I only mildly disliked CoH, mainly due to the repititive, thinly disguised grinding with very little to change the scenery in the game. It was just one cityscape after another for the most part. Keep Turbine away from it too, we've already seen what they can do with D&D. Though if it worked closer to the LotRO engine it'd be ten times better. Blizzard has WoW, so more than likely that's out. Not that I'd want Mr. Kaplan and company anywhere near the D&D license, I'd rather have Cryptic/NCSoft take it first.
Thirdly I think 4th edition can work just fine in a video game environment. Despite what others have said, 3rd edition had a strong outting in the digital arena. A lot of decent games came from D&D 3rd, and some even created an entire genre of games. That Marvel Ultimate Alliance game that is so popular on the 360? Yeah. That was a direct product of the Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance game. Not to mention the NWN games that gave MMO sales a run for its money excluding WoW. You really can't compare WoW to any PC game anymore, it has its own zipcode so to speak. In fact, the only shaky game in the entire series of 3rd edition games was TOEE. That game to me as a D&D game was horrible. The bugs were endless and the fact that you could not choose your own feats and such to customize your character was just outright bad game design.
Lastly, one ideal situation to have happen is have either Sony get the license and make a decent D&D MMO. Now why Sony you ask? I'm sure a lot of you have complaints about Sony etc etc. But face it. They are kings when it comes to MMOs IF you look at how many they have designed and STILL HAVE GOING. EQ is still at around 100k and EQ2 is hovering around 400k. Now compared to WoWs supposed millions (I say supposed because they count cancelled, trial, and banned accounts, as well as gold sellers in their reports), that doesn't sound like a lot, but again you can't use WoW as any measure of comparison anymore. Anything over 100k subscribers is still decent by any stretch for an MMO when you consider how many of them exist, despite what WoW fanboys would have you believe.
The second ideal situation is to have Hasbro realize the cash cow they are sitting on, and open up a new department in their company and hire MMO developers, and create their own MMO with Wizards direct input.
Whoever develops the game has to do several specific things to make it a success. First, do it in a campaign world OTHER than Eberron. That was the mistake the first DDO made. I know I'm not the only old-timer that doesn't want Final Fantasy in my D&D, which is what Eberron is. If I want to play Final Fantasy, I'll play Final Fantasy not D&D. I know that was one of the big outcries against DDO was Eberron. Make it Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, aw hell all three with a connection through the Planes/Astral Sea/Whatever. Though you could just start with one and add the others through expansions or something. Just a thought there.
Anyway another thing is not trap the players one city. Stupid, stupid move on Turbine's part for that. That was my biggest turn-off for DDO. I like to have a WORLD to explore, not be trapped in a town doing the same dungeon over and over and over ad nauseum.
Also don't do the clicky swing thing Turbine did. Another horrible idea. Give us a standard auto attack, and let us use hotbars like any other MMO, and that's where your At-Will/Encounter/Daily powers would go. Though for an MMO those would change slightly and probably just have CDs.
Ultimately 4th edition rules work even better than 3rd edition rules did for a video game. Face it, the powers sytem works in FAVOR of that kind of play. Yes even the sliding/push/etc movement (think strafing, pushbacks and knockdowns in MMOs, especially one like Warhammer Online which makes heavy use of those types of abilities). Now at the moment there is no news whatsoever of any game being produced using the 4th edition ruleset, but I put my money on NWN3 using it when it comes out, and it will, they made too much money on the previous two. It just takes a while for the developers to learn the system, and all its ins and outs and how to adapt it to a digital world, and what they can do with it. I think we'll see one come out eventually, and as I said above, my bet is NWN3 being the first one.
Ultimately 4th edition rules work even better than 3rd edition rules did for a video game.
Actually, not necessarily. One of the primary goals of 4E was to reduce the amount of calculation that the players had to do during gameplay. That is why stuff like ability damage was removed from the game. However, a computer can handle those sorts of calculations just fine. Ability damage and the cascading math it causes would not be a problem for a game run on a computer. In many ways, 4E D&D took the game in a direction away from what computer games are good at.
Though I will grant you that it is probably easier to code 4E powers thanks to the significant improvements in the templating of powers over what 3E had, and the use of more standardized terms.
Actually putting the MMO in a new world was fine. SCREWING up that new world was not. They didn't have all the races, classes or even fluff that Eberron is supposed to have. If they couldn't have done Eberron right they should have done something else, like FR. Much as I don't like FR it's been around longer and probably would have been easier to do.
Single Player
Turn Based
Eberron
Keith Baker as Writer
FINAL DESTINATION
-Joni
There is so much information in the 4e campaign and players guide, that they would have no problem making a game... now a MMO, that might be tough. Now if they did something like put a limit on the amount of people in a single instance of a game... like say 20... and they could just start to use all the adventures already published...
However i am waiting for the Game Table, thats why i have a monthly Subscription to DDI.
i feel that they are almost there in making an RTS/RPG already, thye just need to put it in high gear... take some of the people off Magic Online and put them to better use...
even a Magic the Gathering game with the 4e system would work(yeah my group and I already made a hefty house rules binder just off the decade or so we have been playing that one adn the 20 some years of playing DnD)
sorry for ranting... but i would love to see even a remake of Baldurs Gate with modern graphics and improved gamepaly...
just dont let Sony get a finger on any game... Atari is buying up smaller companies again... maybe they could make more DnD games... even something like Marvel Ultimate alliance...
how about a DS game... Players handbook in a GBA cartridge... DM's guide/monsters manual as the DS cartridge... ooh.... that would rock...
But those criers were wrong, its not that compatibile with MMOs, you can't play 4e in real time- there are too many reactions and forced movement to make it work. I'm going to ignore this thread now because I think it's a thinly disguised edition war.
I love, and play 4E, and I STILL would call it MMO in nature. It is easily convertible to an MMO, or any other computer/ console game. So I'm sorry if you think "No you're wrong" is a valid argument, but I have to tell you, it's the farthest thing from.
All editions have been possible to convert to a digital game system, so to suggest that the simplest of the editions/ rule sets couldn't be, is just silly to put it mildly.
-RW
I love, and play 4E, and I STILL would call it MMO in nature. It is easily convertible to an MMO, or any other computer/ console game. So I'm sorry if you think "No you're wrong" is a valid argument, but I have to tell you, it's the farthest thing from.
All editions have been possible to convert to a digital game system, so to suggest that the simplest of the editions/ rule sets couldn't be, is just silly to put it mildly.
-RW
My argument wasn't "no, you are wrong" it was "No, the rules don't fuction in real time- which MMOs have to be". Any other kind of video game, sure 4e is golden, even a turn based limited player online like Gunbound- but when you move into Massive multiplayer it breaks down.
Actually your wrong that Eberron is "Final Fantasy." Not even. It sounds to me like you know very little about the setting if your labeling it "Final Fantasy." Considering a few of the Final Fantasy games were more like traditional D&D anyway, that label doesn't always work.
Actually putting the MMO in a new world was fine. SCREWING up that new world was not. They didn't have all the races, classes or even fluff that Eberron is supposed to have. If they couldn't have done Eberron right they should have done something else, like FR. Much as I don't like FR it's been around longer and probably would have been easier to do.
When they use magic to mimic technology and technology to mimic magic, I call it Final Fantasy since that was one of the first (may have been another, ifi ther eis I am unaware of it) games to do it. I am familiar enough (I've read the core setting book) with the setting to know I don't care for it because of it's FF flavoring (in my book). Don't ever assume someone isn't familiar with something by the way, it's bad form and leads to strawman arguements.
But seriously, magic, living constructs? Airships? Lightning Rail trains?
Smacks of Final Fantasy to me. To top it off, I prefer the creatures to fall into their normal alignment types, call me old-fashioned but I think that liches, vampires and death knights should be evil, with the very rare and marked exception. Eberron has this thing where a silver dragon could actually be evil and a balor could be good. Uh...no? Okay sorry for the derailing rant. I'm done now.I don't think it would break down really. The powers could still work in real time with some modification.
I agree 100%. As I pointed out, sliding is easily modified into strafing etc. Forcing an enemy to slide would be a knockback effect. Knocking them down, causes them to fall over. So on and so forth. Go play Warhammer Online or at least watch a video with some of the RvR action in it, there are plenty of examples of this. There are a ridiculous amount of powers in WAR that have these effects, and more.
When they use magic to mimic technology and technology to mimic magic, I call it Final Fantasy since that was one of the first (may have been another, ifi ther eis I am unaware of it) games to do it. I am familiar enough (I've read the core setting book) with the setting to know I don't care for it because of it's FF flavoring (in my book). Don't ever assume someone isn't familiar with something by the way, it's bad form and leads to strawman arguements.
But seriously, magic, living constructs? Airships? Lightning Rail trains?
And what is wrong with living constructs? Considering you could have a sentient construct in older editions? Oh and Lighting Rail trains isn't ok but everyone having magical items out the wazoo and high level mukity mucks everywhere yet the world somehow still needs heros?
Oh btw, WRONG about the Balor. Totally, utterly wrong. It is also ridiculous to say that a silver dragon is always good, that it has no choice. WHY? It's not an angel or a demon. There is no magical compulsion to make it good. Creatures whose existence is tied into their alignment are still evil however. I had that discussion with Keith Baker himself. In fact he said this on Always, Often and the other alingments. You cannot have a good Balor, if it somehow became good it would be something else. The following is what he told me a long time ago about how he runs with alignments on monsters.
* Always. The only creatures I run with "Always" alignments are those whose alignment is literally tied to their very existence - and who, by their nature, essentially have no free will. In Eberron, the primary example of this are immortal outsiders. A Quori doesn't choose to be evil and an Angel doesn't choose to be good; they simply ARE those things, because they are essentially ideas given form. Even in these cases, it is possible for an angel to fall or quori to rise, which is how you get kalashtar and radiant idols. But when their alignment changes, they literally become something else, because their alignment is such a fundamental aspect of what they are. You can't have a good radiant idol; at that point it's no longer a radiant idol, it's an angel. Immortal outsiders, by and large, lack the ability to question their role in the universe. Those few that do often end up becoming something else entirely.
* Often. There are two ways to fall into this category. The pirmary method is to have a supernatural force that is overriding your conscious desires and forcing you down a path. This is certainly the case with lycanthropes, but I'll come back to them later. In my mind, vampires and most sentient negative undead are driven towards evil because of the corrupting influence of Mabar and the need to feed on others in order to survive - something that eats away at your empathy. But a strong-willed vampire could certainly overcome that urge, and if you take a per capita analysis of angels and vampires, there's more non-evil vampries than there are radiant idols. (Again, more on lycanthropes later.) This is also the case with the kalashtar, or lesser outsiders like tieflings. The kalashtar are influenced by an outside force - their quori spirits - that push them in the direction of a certain alignment. But they CAN ignore that, and there are a considerable number of evil kalashtar in the world.
The second way to get an "often" alignment would be to be part of a culture that engages in severe indoctrination of its citizens. This won't be a RACIAL alignment - but you could certainly end up saying "Most Ghaash'kala orcs are good."
* After this, you get everyone else. If you're an intelligent creature free from supernatural influence, you're on your own path. There's nothing that makes, for example, orcs any more likely to be evil than humans.
Your not familiar enough with the setting. The core book doesn't even really scratch the surface. I doubt you really READ it and absorbed it so much as looked at it and didn't like it and only remembered the things you hated.
And what is wrong with living constructs? Considering you could have a sentient construct in older editions? Oh and Lighting Rail trains isn't ok but everyone having magical items out the wazoo and high level mukity mucks everywhere yet the world somehow still needs heros?
Oh btw, WRONG about the Balor. Totally, utterly wrong. It is also ridiculous to say that a silver dragon is always good, that it has no choice. WHY? It's not an angel or a demon. There is no magical compulsion to make it good. Creatures whose existence is tied into their alignment are still evil however. I had that discussion with Keith Baker himself. In fact he said this on Always, Often and the other alingments. You cannot have a good Balor, if it somehow became good it would be something else. The following is what he told me a long time ago about how he runs with alignments on monsters.
Your not familiar enough with the setting. The core book doesn't even really scratch the surface. I doubt you really READ it and absorbed it so much as looked at it and didn't like it and only remembered the things you hated.
I never said having magic items out the wazoo was okay, nor did I ever insinuate I would play in a setting where there are tons of high level NPCs. Fact is I run a homebrew campaign world that is just the opposite. PCs count their lucky stars when they come across some piece of magic equipment from the old empires. There are a few higher level (by that I mean levels 10-15) NPCs running around, but they are very very few (like 3 or 4) and far between.
As for Silver (and other metallics for that matter) Dragons, traditionally they are tied to Bahumut as the Chromatic dragons are tied to Tiamat, and they are inherently made from the very stuff of those gods. At least in the old canon they were. Which means to the dragon gods they are as angels and demons. Not that angels are inherently good anymore as much as neutral messengers and such.
And I may have only read the main campaign book, and yes I read and absorbed it at the time. I just never picked it up after the first read through, which means yes, my knowledge may be a bit rusty, but it's still there. Again never assume anything about a person. Still bad form.
As for the alignment thing. I tend to be traditional. A lich is evil because it was a selfish enough person to cheat the natural order of things to prolong it's unnatural life through dark arcane magics. A vampire (lord not a turned one) typically is the same thing, just using a different route to get there. I could possibly see a person turned against their will fighting it off, but it has to be done without the person coming off as a whiny woe-is-me type character. To use a couple of pop-culture references here; Louie was horrible as that type of character. Blade accepted what he was, and used it to his advantage. As for orcs and such, I can agree it's usually a cultural thing that makes them the evil in most settings. I can accept alternate views on human type races because culture tends to play a role (in D&D anyway) on one's alignment. But don't ever expect me to accept a good blue dragon, or an evil unicorn unless it is an extraordinary, rare phenomenon dealing with the current storyline. Story is king and trumps all rules in my book. But those sort of things should be the extreme end of the bell curve and not in the middle, or even anywhere near the middle. But this is all opinion when it comes down to it.
I will never be sold on the setting, nor will I ever be sold on my best friend's setting which has similar imagery and fluff to Eberron. To be fair, I was never sold on Forgotten Realms, which is the other golden child of D&D settings. To be honest, in my opinion, the only decent settings to come out of the various D&D design teams were Greyhawk, Mystara, Dragonlance, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, and Birthright. None of which are in production by the actual D&D design teams anymore thanks to their rather zealot-like worship of FR and Eberron. Heh I would geek over a MMO based in any one of the mentioned settings, especially Birthright or Dragonlance. Again my opinion, and I accept you have your view as well, after all, that's what makes this hobby as diverse as it is. Keep in mind, I never trashed the setting. I merely stated that to me it seemed a lot like Final Fantasy and that for a D&D setting it was not my cup of tea is all. Believ eme, I would love a Final fantasy TT RPG, so much so that I've been working off and on on my own for years now.
Anyway this is getting off-topic again. My opinion: Birthright or Dragonlance MMO produced directly by Hasbro with WotCs direct input, and for the sake of all that's good and holy in this world get some of the original authors back for it! And whatever you guys do, do NOT hire Mr. Kaplan or Mr. Afrasiabi to help develop it.
My argument wasn't "no, you are wrong" it was "No, the rules don't fuction in real time- which MMOs have to be". Any other kind of video game, sure 4e is golden, even a turn based limited player online like Gunbound- but when you move into Massive multiplayer it breaks down.
The rules are turn based true, but they represent real time. Do you honestly thing you have a whole field of people standing around, each calling out a number they'd like to go in, and taking turns, to make sure they got to do what they wanted? No, the whole "round" happens simultaneously. The issue with RT in a tabletop game, is everyone would be shouting what they do at the same time, and the DM would somehow have to try and select in order what they heard first, and apply the stats as necessary.
MMO do all the calculations behind the scene with a game engine. So all you need to do is select your power(s) and point then click. The game figures out who cast/ move first and applies as needed.
3.5 had an MMO in DDO, and it translated the rules fine. Granted some things were changed to make it more playable, but most of those changes were drawn from alternate rules in UA and the like. So a system so geared to the "all day fighting" like 4E, and with relatively simplistic rules, should be a no brainer to properly convert.
-RW
DDO also had rolling in it, everyone can evade attacks by rolling - where did that come from.
An accurate conversion of 4E is unlikely unless its turn based, i'm sure there might be a 4E based game. Thought I'd rather play an Ebberon or FR styled tomb raider adventure game that didn't bother so much with the rules, than have an RPG that just plain failed.
Hot keying would be possible, as would a Qued system, thus allowing players to select actions in advance, so that they took play immediately in their next allotted "6 seconds". Additionally, the player could outside of combat, que up to perhaps 2 - 3 rounds, so that when combat began, those actions would be taken without need for player activation. This would allow a player to select future actions in a more relaxed manner.
Should a Leader use an ability granting additional actions in a round already prepped, the player would see perhaps a flash on the screen, where an empty slot would appear to be filled with that extra action. Alternatively, that extra action would tack on to the last qued action, if it proved to be required for snap decisions.
The beauty of 4e is it's simplicity, and that whether you're 8th level, or 30th level, you have virtually the same abilities. So there is no need for an elaborate que system, with infinite options that the players can't possibly use. With the change in most powers now reflecting a more finite advantage, --such as flying-- there is no longer the need to restrict, remove, or alter anything due to the constraints of the virtual world, such as Sky boxes, edges to maps, or tops of buildings you shouldn't be on.
Working in the animation/ gaming industry, I think I should know what can and can't be done.:P
-RW
A well-written 4e-based SRPG (the same genre as Gold Box, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Fire Emblem) would be just the ticket to making a really good D&D video game. I know I'd play it - especially if it were portable. DSi, anyone?
The rules are turn based true, but they represent real time. Do you honestly thing you have a whole field of people standing around, each calling out a number they'd like to go in, and taking turns, to make sure they got to do what they wanted? No, the whole "round" happens simultaneously. The issue with RT in a tabletop game, is everyone would be shouting what they do at the same time, and the DM would somehow have to try and select in order what they heard first, and apply the stats as necessary.
MMO do all the calculations behind the scene with a game engine. So all you need to do is select your power(s) and point then click. The game figures out who cast/ move first and applies as needed.
3.5 had an MMO in DDO, and it translated the rules fine. Granted some things were changed to make it more playable, but most of those changes were drawn from alternate rules in UA and the like. So a system so geared to the "all day fighting" like 4E, and with relatively simplistic rules, should be a no brainer to properly convert.
-RW
Other 4e things that don't work in Real time:
How about friendly forced movement via warlord powers- do you really want the player and warlord to cancel each other out or overdue it when they both try to move.
How about Initiative- it doesn't exist in real time
How about giving players time to think and plan their abilities instead of spamming a mapped out ability sequence (10 round combat in 60 seconds!).
How about ground targeted aoe- how are you going to delicately place one that can hurt allies when nothing stops moving.
Action points? Rerolls? Pet control? Talking as a free action without some kind of VOIP? The problems of Latency or disconnections? Story driven control over time of day (you short rest, you sleep, you wait for nightfall)?
Seriously, what you would have would barely resemble 4e at all.
How about friendly forced movement via warlord powers- do you really want the player and warlord to cancel each other out or overdue it when they both try to move.
Give me an example, as I don't see how forced movement can't be done. So long as a person was in a group, they'd be counted as Friendly and thus susceptible to any allied powers. The same would be true the opposite way.
How about Initiative- it doesn't exist in real time
It isn't needed in RT. Initiative is simply done to see who draws, or casts the fastest, and give an order in which to play. This makes it possible for the DM to divide up combat in a manageable manner. In truth, everything happens in 6 seconds, as the world explodes into violence. Initiative if anything is unbelievable and needs reworking.
Initiative allows something that technically happens simultaneously, to give the advantage to one person or another, allowing someone to die before raising a hand. Granted this is possible, if a bit unfair, but I dare say a better case could be made against initiative than for it in RT.
Ultimately, the person who attacks first, is first. They fall behind if they don't select anything to do. Something many DMs practise I might add, to enforce steady game play.
How about giving players time to think and plan their abilities instead of spamming a mapped out ability sequence (10 round combat in 60 seconds!).
Um, I already covered this in detail above, but I'll sum it up I suppose. Out of combat you have the option to set up a que of actions that you take when combat begins. More often than not, it'll simply mean At-Will powers, but that que will give you time to think. Additionally, the time would be altered slightly for combat, so that the delay would give you more time to react for each option. They've done this in many MMOs, and those all have more options than 4E does on it's own.
So, if it is possible for players to keep up with qued actions in other MMOs, why not a simplified one?
How about ground targeted aoe- how are you going to delicately place one that can hurt allies when nothing stops moving.
If you are the faster caster, you get the chance to hit any stationary targets. If not, you simply have a time delay on the area, and if any enemies register in that are within a say 5-10 second count, they are considered within the burst.
Action points?
Items using action points, expend them when the power is used. Using the action point for an action, is as simple as clicking it, and then clicking on the desired effect. It would que two actions in that round, rather than one.
Rerolls?
It is an option you would set in your que, immediately after selecting the power you wanted to protect with the reroll. If the power needed it, the computer would automatically reroll it for you. If not, then it would vanish from the que unused to be reselected.
Pet control?
Since pets use your actions, they should be simple to use. And again, this comes down to the time delay. Additionally, there could be AI in play for this, allowing you to have a pre set instruction for it to follow, as many DnD games have done in the past.
Talking as a free action without some kind of VOIP?
Free actions are still actions. In the que they'd virtually appear and vanish. As I recall, you only get three per combat, so that is no great worry. They would simply happen faster than a standard. This is why you have times associated with each action, and the computer handles the rest.
The problems of Latency or disconnections?
This is a software/ hardware issue, and not one with converting 4e to an MMO. That said, I'll answer it anyway. First, buy a better machine. If you don't want to put out the coin, don't complain you don't run as well as everyone else.
Secondly, if there are connection issues with your server, and it goes down, they will have a resolution for it, and should something negative happen to your character, could possibly compensate you in game.
Lastly, if it is your connection, then while again I say your issue, I will note that certain redundancies can be built into the system so that with more than an (x) second delay with your connection, you are booted and your character vanishes from the game. Thus no harm can come to you.
Story driven control over time of day (you short rest, you sleep, you wait for nightfall)?
Short rest takes real world time of 5 minutes. Full rest would be one tricky thing, but could be over come with rest penalties IE: resting in a tent, or in a certain area, and implementing an 8 hour equivalent table for random encounters.
This said, if the full night rest is something that makes DnD for you, you might be playing the wrong game.
Seriously, what you would have would barely resemble 4e at all.
What I just gave you is 4e to the core. And that was off the top of my head, sitting here just typing away. I'm one guy, who works in one company, making suggestions in my free time. Think of what a team could do, when they are paid for it 8 hours a day.
-RW
Also, why should the game producers change a working formula. D&D games work fine (NWN, Dark Alliance) so there is no need to change the rules system. Converting those games to 4E would only alienate a lot of gamers and add nothing to the game. Most D&D video gamers don't also play PnP and don't care if the backbone of the game is the newest edition.
At best we will see a 3E 4E mix like in Baldurs Gate 2/Icewind Dale 2 where classes and races from 3E was transplanted into the 2E game. So its likely that the next NWN addon/version will have Dragonborn in them.
If there will be a "real" 4E video game (not some Dark Alliance action stuff) then it will be a new series (its not good to change the system of an already established game series as it makes the players of the previous titles uncomfortable/angry) and so far there is no indication that Atari (the one with the license) or Obsidian, the company who has made the last few D&D games on PC is working or even has the capacity to work on a new D&D game series. The only thing which is known is that Obsidian is working on a new NWN2 addon (which means 3E).
And a D&D MMO? Very unlikely. The last attempt crahs and burned horribly. Also the MMO market is currently saturated, especially in the fantasy section. Age of Conan failed. Warhammer wasn't as much of a hit as expected. And it has been pretty quiet from LOTRO. What makes you think a D&D MMO can do better than those? World of Warcraft currently dominates everything on the fantasy MMO sector.
PS: The latest NWN 2 addon has many 4E references (Zehir, the Spellplague and it is likely that those themes will be explored in the next Addon, a evidence for my 43/3E mix).
A "real" 4E PC game will likely won't happen. Today turn based games, which a faithful 4E conversion needs to be, don't fare well on the mainstream market except on handhelds.
Also, why should the game producers change a working formula. D&D games work fine (NWN, Dark Alliance) so there is no need to change the rules system. Converting those games to 4E would only alienate a lot of gamers and add nothing to the game. Most D&D video gamers don't also play PnP and don't care if the backbone of the game is the newest edition.
At best we will see a 3E 4E mix like in Baldurs Gate 2/Icewind Dale 2 where classes and races from 3E was transplanted into the 2E game. So its likely that the next NWN addon/version will have Dragonborn in them.
If there will be a "real" 4E video game (not some Dark Alliance action stuff) then it will be a new series (its not good to change the system of an already established game series as it makes the players of the previous titles uncomfortable/angry) and so far there is no indication that Atari (the one with the license) or Obsidian, the company who has made the last few D&D games on PC is working or even has the capacity to work on a new D&D game series. The only thing which is known is that Obsidian is working on a new NWN2 addon (which means 3E).
And a D&D MMO? Very unlikely. The last attempt crahs and burned horribly. Also the MMO market is currently saturated, especially in the fantasy section. Age of Conan failed. Warhammer wasn't as much of a hit as expected. And it has been pretty quiet from LOTRO. What makes you think a D&D MMO can do better than those? World of Warcraft currently dominates everything on the fantasy MMO sector.
PS: The latest NWN 2 addon has many 4E references (Zehir, the Spellplague and it is likely that those themes will be explored in the next Addon, a evidence for my 43/3E mix).
The reason DDO crashed and failed can be broken down to three reasons.
1) Eberron. Honestly Eberron is not a setting that new players to the D&D game can grasp as easily as an older campaign world like Greyhawk or Mystara. You need to stick to core conecepts when you market outside of your normal customer base.
2) Being stuck in a singular city doing the same dungeons over an over was a craptacular move on Turbines part. Design the world so we can explore it, and we will come.
3)'Action Oriented Gameplay'. Horrible, horrible idea. The click and swing mechanic just does not work for a MMO. Give us an auto-attack and hotbars like other MMOs.
Now as to the other parts of your post. Seriously, you should read my initial post. I explained this once before, but I'll do it again. You cannot compare WoW to other MMOs in terms of success anymore. They claim 12 million subscribers, which includes trial, canceled, banned, and gold farming accounts. They leave nothing out when they report those numbers. It's decietful and misleading. Honestly I don't know why WoW is as successful as it is. There are other MMOs that are 100 times the game WoW is. WAR for your information was just as much a success as Mythic was hoping. More so really. Get your facts straight before shooting off at the mouth please. EQ2 still boasts 400k players or so. That is quite a success for an MMO. LOTRO I think is sitting between 100k and 200k I believe. Age of Conan failed because the developer decided to shoot it in the head. No joke. I swear they wanted it to fail. So you really can't count it. A D&D MMO if done PROPERLY could do very very well.
Give me an example, as I don't see how forced movement can't be done. So long as a person was in a group, they'd be counted as Friendly and thus susceptible to any allied powers. The same would be true the opposite way.
Real time game= free real time movement. that means I start walking towards a monster, the warlord tries to help and moves me where I wanted to go- either I overmove (maybe even provoking an OA) because I didn't realise the warlord was moving me, or the warlords move doesn't get me there any sooner because I stopped my steps to let him finish. Nevermind the hassles of the warlord moving himself and me at the same time.
It isn't needed in RT. Initiative is simply done to see who draws, or casts the fastest, and give an order in which to play. This makes it possible for the DM to divide up combat in a manageable manner. In truth, everything happens in 6 seconds, as the world explodes into violence. Initiative if anything is unbelievable and needs reworking.
Initiative allows something that technically happens simultaneously, to give the advantage to one person or another, allowing someone to die before raising a hand. Granted this is possible, if a bit unfair, but I dare say a better case could be made against initiative than for it in RT.
Ultimately, the person who attacks first, is first. They fall behind if they don't select anything to do. Something many DMs practise I might add, to enforce steady game play.
In so doing you've removed an iconic stat from the game, decreasing the value of Dex and any initiative feats and features. So now it's all player reaction time and connection latency.
Um, I already covered this in detail above, but I'll sum it up I suppose. Out of combat you have the option to set up a que of actions that you take when combat begins. More often than not, it'll simply mean At-Will powers, but that que will give you time to think. Additionally, the time would be altered slightly for combat, so that the delay would give you more time to react for each option. They've done this in many MMOs, and those all have more options than 4E does on it's own.
So, if it is possible for players to keep up with qued actions in other MMOs, why not a simplified one?
The movement and power choice are a lot more contemplative in 4e than most MMOs. In an MMO you autoattack every 1-4 seconds and use specials as fast as the game lets you push buttons- generally you have less than 10 options for specials to invoke, 4e expects you'll only take about 10 attack actions in a normal combat, where eventually you have 2(3)+4+4 powers before counting Racial, Class Feature, Item, or Feat Powers or Charge/Bullrush/Aid/Combat Skill use.
Also consider reading outputs of things like Monster knowledge, perception checks, and player communication will be impractical in a timed setting.
If you are the faster caster, you get the chance to hit any stationary targets. If not, you simply have a time delay on the area, and if any enemies register in that are within a say 5-10 second count, they are considered within the burst.
And how will your allies know when/where to stay out of the blast. If you ever used ground targeted AOEs in WoW, they are pain and definantly lack the resolution needed for potential friendly fire.
Items using action points, expend them when the power is used. Using the action point for an action, is as simple as clicking it, and then clicking on the desired effect. It would que two actions in that round, rather than one.
deciding, performing, and comrehending the outcome of your standard minor and move actions within 6 seconds, then tell me if you can press the button fast enough to get it in the turn you wanted it for.
Since pets use your actions, they should be simple to use. And again, this comes down to the time delay. Additionally, there could be AI in play for this, allowing you to have a pre set instruction for it to follow, as many DnD games have done in the past.
And an AI for your pet/Bag of Tricks/Summons would be awful compared to what you could accomplish with them if you had time to move them precisely.
Free actions are still actions. In the que they'd virtually appear and vanish. As I recall, you only get three per combat, so that is no great worry. They would simply happen faster than a standard. This is why you have times associated with each action, and the computer handles the rest.
You get as many free actions in a round as the DM will give you- but my point was a single phrase of "in character" speech probably takes at least 10 seconds to type out and your friends will want to read it- now imagine if you wanted to say anything more complicated than "SOS healer aggro" in the middle of the fight.
This is a software/ hardware issue, and not one with converting 4e to an MMO. That said, I'll answer it anyway. First, buy a better machine. If you don't want to put out the coin, don't complain you don't run as well as everyone else.
Secondly, if there are connection issues with your server, and it goes down, they will have a resolution for it, and should something negative happen to your character, could possibly compensate you in game.
Lastly, if it is your connection, then while again I say your issue, I will note that certain redundancies can be built into the system so that with more than an (x) second delay with your connection, you are booted and your character vanishes from the game. Thus no harm can come to you.
The Internet will never be 100% reliable with connections nor will the latency ever be trivial beyond a handful of PCs playing over a LAN. What my real was though is that 4e doesn't have allowances for a player missing turns because of internet blips- what should happen when the rest of your party died while you got DCed mid fight?
Short rest takes real world time of 5 minutes. Full rest would be one tricky thing, but could be over come with rest penalties IE: resting in a tent, or in a certain area, and implementing an 8 hour equivalent table for random encounters.
This said, if the full night rest is something that makes DnD for you, you might be playing the wrong game.
I don't think most people would appreciate having to wait 5 minutes doing nothing for what used to take 5 seconds to say whether or not a short rest was allowed. Likewise an extended rest is 5 seconds of life time- if your DM likes attacking during the night how would you deal with actions to fortify a resting place- sealing doors or placing warning rituals. "Waiting till nightfall" is a key feature of any stealth operation, but you also want the night to last long enough to finish it.
It's based on the d20 system though and I liked how it worked. I hope the Old Republic will follow a similar model.
Given that The Old Republic is an MMO, I'd say the chances of it using any d20 ruleset is next to nil.
The only MMO I can think of that used a vaguely d20ish ruleset is D&D Online. The main reason being, it's D&D... online.
In before flamewar.
And, by the way, I think it would be terrible if The Old Republic used any d20 rules, 4e or not.
PnP RPG rules do not a good MMO make.
The reason DDO crashed and failed can be broken down to three reasons.
Stuff...
That doesn't matter. Fact is D&D failed as MMO once before, giving the name D&D a bad reputation among MMO players.
That means it will be harder to market another D&D MMO in the future.
Now as to the other parts of your post. Seriously, you should read my initial post. I explained this once before, but I'll do it again. You cannot compare WoW to other MMOs in terms of success anymore. They claim 12 million subscribers, which includes trial, canceled, banned, and gold farming accounts. They leave nothing out when they report those numbers. It's decietful and misleading. Honestly I don't know why WoW is as successful as it is. There are other MMOs that are 100 times the game WoW is. WAR for your information was just as much a success as Mythic was hoping. More so really. Get your facts straight before shooting off at the mouth please. EQ2 still boasts 400k players or so. That is quite a success for an MMO. LOTRO I think is sitting between 100k and 200k I believe. Age of Conan failed because the developer decided to shoot it in the head. No joke. I swear they wanted it to fail. So you really can't count it. A D&D MMO if done PROPERLY could do very very well.
Care to mention where you got those numbers? I guess you completely made them up.
EA announced in their press conference last month that Warhammer Online has 300k active subscribers [link]. Mythic already had to lay off people. LOTR has likely about the same number of subscribers, EQ (both versions) less than that.
Considering how much time an MMO needs it is very unlikely that someone plays multiple MMOS. That means that, even if you don't like it, a fantasy MMO has to compete with WoW for subscribers.
And I don't see how a D&D MMO would do that unless there is a serious investment behind it, an investment both WotC/Hasbro and most developers are not willing to make (especially in the current market situation). Especially if you translate the 4E rules faithfully like its described in this thread an MMO would have no chance at all on the market. SUch a translation would please the PnP players who also play the MMO, but this is a tiny fraction of the target group and everyone else will be displeased by the clunky mechanics.
The chance that someone will make an D&D MMO is very low. The chance that it will be a faithful representation of 4E is even lower and the chance that such a game would succeed is extremely low. With WoW sucking the money out of the (fantasy) MMO target group it doesn't make much sense to make a D&D MMO now.
Better hope for an offline game, but even there Atari/Obsidian seem to be sticking with the tested 3E system for now and just add 4E story elements.
I would bring up to the people totally focused on the MMO that the topic is if there would be a 4th ed computer game OR an MMO. So I was curious about single player games like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale or maybe even a NWN 4th ed game.
Well, see my first post.
Changing an already established setting (NWN 3 with 4E mechanics, for example) is a bad idea beacues all NWN/NWN2 players will be disappointed. Instead you have to make a new game series for D&D 4E. And so far there is no indication that someone is doing a new D&D game or even has the capacity to do a new game from ground up. All I know is there is a new NWN2 expansion in the works and my guess is that Atari will continue to use 3E mechanics (already tested + most NWN2 players don't care if they play 4E or not. Also 4E mechanics are kind of awkward to do in (semi) real time) with 4E story elements behind it (Zehir, Spellplague, baybe even include Dragonborn as playable race).
The one thing I will say is that NWN 2 uses 3.5, NWN 1 uses 3.0. So a NWN 3 using 4e wouldn't be too far fetched, and I wouldn't be surprised if it happened. After thinking on this some more, and speaking things over with my wife and a friend, I would like to see a new franchise personally. Something that used turn-based strategy ala the SSI gold box series, and combined with the story-driven aspects of Bioware games if a new single-player game were made. With the possibility of making your own story and dungeons built in, like the Endless Adventures gold box or the NWN creation tools. Oh and the added bonus of multiplayer would be awesome.
I think the more interesting question is whether or not 4e combat would work in real time. I have to cast my vote for 'no'. Simply put, there's just a lot more going on in a given turn in a 4e round of combat than in a 3.5 round. You've got standard actions, minor actions, action points, pushing, pulling, etc.
More to the point, 4e combat is designed to work in a very specific way, more so than in any previous edition. It's tactical, it's grid-based, and it's turn-based. You could MAYBE get away from the grid in a CRPG and have things be a little more fluid, but it's really hard for me to imagine how it could be in real time and have any resemblance to the RAW. The tactics that 4e expects in combat are completely dependent on the order in which the PCs and monsters take their turns. That's why delays and triggers are built right into the game.
3e CRPG combat was basically a matter of clicking on who you wanted to hit next or, if you were a sorcerer, queuing up a bunch of fireballs. 4e combat is much more intricate and I think it would suffer in real time.
I do highly disagree that NWN 3 would not do well if based on 4th ed. As a previous poster pointed out, NWN 1 was 3.0, NWN 2 was 3.5, why shouldn't NWN 3 be 4th ed? I'd suspect if they did a NWN 3 that would be the logical next step and I'd bet they would add in the FR changes as well. The cool thing though about a game that allows you to create your own content is you don't really need to get the next game if you like what you have already.
My question was NOT "Could 4th ed be an MMO." My question was "Will there be a 4th ed computer game or MMO?" Also 2cd ed, 3rd ed and 3.5 are all turn based combat well cause DUH it's a pencil and paper RPG! That's kinda how pencil and paper RPGs work. WoD is turn based too, Warhammer is turn based. So to act like the turn based problem is a D&D thing is pretty silly. There is going to be a WoD mmo coming up so I'd like to see a new D&D one. I agree that confining all the action to a city was very lame. The Eberron setting is one I was interested in exploring and then I was confined to Xen Drik in Stormreach. As cool as I find Stormreach, I don't find being stuck there to be terribly cool.
I do highly disagree that NWN 3 would not do well if based on 4th ed. As a previous poster pointed out, NWN 1 was 3.0, NWN 2 was 3.5, why shouldn't NWN 3 be 4th ed? I'd suspect if they did a NWN 3 that would be the logical next step and I'd bet they would add in the FR changes as well. The cool thing though about a game that allows you to create your own content is you don't really need to get the next game if you like what you have already.
The difference between 2E/3E and 4E combat is that in 4E a large part of combat is to push the enemy where you want him to be, and such detailed actions are not doable in semi real time. You would have to remove all push/slide effects which means a major combat revision. And Atari certainly wont risk making a turn based game on "higher" platforms (PC, current gen consoles) as they don't sell well and D&D games are one of the few profitable Atari games.
The difference between NWN 1 and 2 (3.0 to 3.5) is minimal and for non D&D players (the majority of the target group of NWN) likely not even noticeable. A change from 3.4 to 4E is very noticeable on the other hand and many fans of the NWN series would dislike getting a different game when they expected another installment of NWN. Just look at the Dawn of War 1 vs Dawn of War 2 debate and compared to 3E to 4E the differences in those games are rather small.
There are also thematical problems with Neverwinter being destroyed in 4E. Imo they will do it like in Baldurs Gate 2 and only import some stuff from the next edition.
For a real 4E game a new series is likely needed, especially as this game requires a new engine as the NWN engine (Aurora?) can't handle 4E well. For example it is not possible to add feats to special abilities (in NWN 2 you can't use Precise Shot with a Warlocks blast and that is not a basic attack) and in 4E you nearly always use special attacks and not basic ones.
And currently Obsidian (the traditional D&D developer) does not have the capacity to work on such a project as they already work on the Star Wars MMO and another NWN 2 expansion. Same goes for Bioware (Dragon Age, Mass Effect + they are now under EA and not Atari and don't want to make another D&D game anyway, even if they would be allowed to)
Working in the animation/ gaming industry, I think I should know what can and can't be done.:P
-RW
And yet you fail to grasp the extent of programming and logistical issues there would be in making an accurate realtime version of 4E.
You could make compromises to powers, but you'd have to change a lot of different abilities and powers or end up with a messy system, you might bring about reasonable adaptations though.
This ignores that combat is fundamentally different in 4E than in prior edditions. All CRPG adaptations of D&D in the past have had to make massive compromises in how combat is handled. Not to mention how rituals are used and how rests are handled.
Then again, what kind of 4E game are we making? I'd rather have an online RPG exploration game, but not one built like a typical MORPG.
And currently Obsidian (the traditional D&D developer) does not have the capacity to work on such a project as they already work on the Star Wars MMO and another NWN 2 expansion. Same goes for Bioware (Dragon Age, Mass Effect + they are now under EA and not Atari and don't want to make another D&D game anyway, even if they would be allowed to)
Obsidian aren't working on a Star Wars MMO, that's Bioware with Star Wars: The Old Republic. I believe Obsidian were working on an Aliens MMO which has been cancelled, and they've got Alpha Protocol (? - a modern day spy RPG) coming out. I did think when 4e was first announced that the MMO Bioware were working on would be for 4e but that was before the ST:tOR announcement, and I don't think they'd really be interested any more with their own projects doing well.
Obsidian aren't working on a Star Wars MMO, that's Bioware with Star Wars: The Old Republic. I believe Obsidian were working on an Aliens MMO which has been cancelled, and they've got Alpha Protocol (? - a modern day spy RPG) coming out. I did think when 4e was first announced that the MMO Bioware were working on would be for 4e but that was before the ST:tOR announcement, and I don't think they'd really be interested any more with their own projects doing well.
Ah, ok. Got mixed them up becuase Obsidian did KOTOR 2. But Bioware works for EA who does not have the D&D license. So no D&D games from them. Also they made Dragon Age specifically to get away from D&D and to develop their own fantasy world.
I just saw that Obsidian is currently hiring for a console RPG. That could be for a 4E game, but I doubt it. First I can't imagine a D&D like game on a mainstream console and second they likely work on KOTOR 3 instead of D&D 4E.
Either way, should one come out, I won't be playing it, so it doesn't rightly matter in the long run, hense losing interest in defending a moot point. :P
Oh and Igniz, given that I also have experience in Java, C++, and Flash's Actionscript, I'd say I'm up to date on scripting, and the logistics behind it. Even IF that were not the case, I could walk less than 10 feet in the studio itself, and run into no less than 3 programmers, each working on varied aspects of one game or another.
If that still didn't suffice, I could go so far as to make a handful of phone calls to several gaming friends --working for Keene, X-Wave, IBM, and the local Power Company since you may well ask-- and see where they stand on the issue. So maybe I'll let you know when I care if you think I'm qualified to make a call on something that is beyond simple to do. ;)
-RW
Anyway this is getting off-topic again. My opinion: Birthright or Dragonlance MMO produced directly by Hasbro with WotCs direct input, and for the sake of all that's good and holy in this world get some of the original authors back for it! And whatever you guys do, do NOT hire Mr. Kaplan or Mr. Afrasiabi to help develop it.
My opinion is that if a D&D MMO is made, it should be set in the implied Points of Light setting of 4th Edition core.
My reasons for this:
A) While there may be a lot of D&D fans, their tastes are wide and varied. Some people think that Forgotten Realms is the bees knees, while others like Eberron, Dragonlance or Dark Sun. A D&D MMO done right, should be setting neutral, in order to appeal to all of these fan bases.
B) I'm not a fan of MMO's, but I understand that a large part of the fun is exploration. And while this is still possible in a well established setting, the sense of discovery is moreso when treading completely new ground.
On the other topic of campaign setting, I think that reading the campaign guide is more than sufficient do decide whether or not you don't like it. I'm not crazy about Dragonlance, Ravenloft or Greyhawk, and I don't need to read every single sourcebook to feel like I'm making a valid decision there.
I for one really hope for a Disgaea / Final Fantasy Tactics like game using the 4ed rule set.
I strongly second the motion. Though not many people have tried it or games like it, FFT is still one of my favorite games, and it is over a decade old. I would buy a 4e game in that format the day it came out (an I don't usually do that). If they could make a tactical 4e game with a well-executed nonlinear plotline... it's a pretty safe bet that the game in question would be my favorite game, period.
Quaestor the Wanderer
Sufficed to say, I evidently grew bored here, and thus didn't post. Ultimately, you're all welcome to think as you will. If ones comes out, it comes out, if not then it doesn't. So you can all go on thinking that 4e is too complex to port over, and I'll continue playing the incredibly simplistic game that I know 4th edition to be. :P
Either way, should one come out, I won't be playing it, so it doesn't rightly matter in the long run, hense losing interest in defending a moot point. :P
Oh and Igniz, given that I also have experience in Java, C++, and Flash's Actionscript, I'd say I'm up to date on scripting, and the logistics behind it. Even IF that were not the case, I could walk less than 10 feet in the studio itself, and run into no less than 3 programmers, each working on varied aspects of one game or another.
If that still didn't suffice, I could go so far as to make a handful of phone calls to several gaming friends --working for Keene, X-Wave, IBM, and the local Power Company since you may well ask-- and see where they stand on the issue. So maybe I'll let you know when I care if you think I'm qualified to make a call on something that is beyond simple to do. ;)
-RW
It seems like you're missing the point. While WotC does through in the occasional oddball power that is inconvenient to code, the game engine itself is designed to run smoothly without being overly complicated to compute. That part is relatively easy to code. However, a UI that lets you run 4e as it is intended would be more complicated than you suggest. Forced movement alone would be horribly nerfed if you changed it from moving a target up to a certain distance possibly in a winding path of optimal doom down to moving them in a fixed relative direction and distance. You suggest queueing up your standard actions, as if it's the norm for players to know before their turn comes up which power they are going to be using: if that's your experience, it sounds like a much more boring game than what I play on Saturdays. In my experience, stuff happens and the situation changes unpredictably from turn to turn, necessitating a tactical concideration of my actions anew each time my turn comes up. Even if I'm down to at-wills, I try to keep enough variety in my at-wills that I will need to look at the situation as it unfolds to determine which to use each and every turn.
In short, a turn that takes me less than 30 seconds to decide what I'm going to do is a boringly simple turn which fortunately doesn't happen all too often.
Which is why I'll cast my lot in with those who think an MMO version of 4e would be a pale imitation that wasn't worthy of the name, while a turn based FFT/Disgaea style game could do it justice.
Of course, the challenge there would be making tactically intelligent AI that has teamwork. Tactics is a major part of this game after all.
Push and pull arn't too bad, but if a power says "you slide the target 4 squares" that's really hard to adjudicate in real time. The computer has no way of automatically knowing where you want the target moved to.
Similarily, nimble strike can be used to move in so many ways. Move out from cover and attack? Move forward to get into reach? Move back to play-keep away? For this power to work properly you would need 4 or 5 different buttons for the same power.
If you take out all the powers that can't work in an mmo then you take out a lot of what makes 4e fun (and completely gimp the warlord, rogue and to some degree the ranger)
It seems like you're missing the point. While WotC does through in the occasional oddball power that is inconvenient to code, the game engine itself is designed to run smoothly without being overly complicated to compute. That part is relatively easy to code. However, a UI that lets you run 4e as it is intended would be more complicated than you suggest. Forced movement alone would be horribly nerfed if you changed it from moving a target up to a certain distance possibly in a winding path of optimal doom down to moving them in a fixed relative direction and distance. You suggest queueing up your standard actions, as if it's the norm for players to know before their turn comes up which power they are going to be using: if that's your experience, it sounds like a much more boring game than what I play on Saturdays. In my experience, stuff happens and the situation changes unpredictably from turn to turn, necessitating a tactical concideration of my actions anew each time my turn comes up. Even if I'm down to at-wills, I try to keep enough variety in my at-wills that I will need to look at the situation as it unfolds to determine which to use each and every turn.
In short, a turn that takes me less than 30 seconds to decide what I'm going to do is a boringly simple turn which fortunately doesn't happen all too often.
Which is why I'll cast my lot in with those who think an MMO version of 4e would be a pale imitation that wasn't worthy of the name, while a turn based FFT/Disgaea style game could do it justice.
Of course, the challenge there would be making tactically intelligent AI that has teamwork. Tactics is a major part of this game after all.
I was never trying to justify a 4E MMO, nor suggest it would be fun. I was simply pointing out ways around certain issues. I'm saying queing powers would be fun, or something to do at the table top, I just didn't find it reasonable to imply it was impossible, or that a lot would need to change.
-RW