Because of school, work, and just plain scheduling issues... I haven't played 4th edition for about a month. Don't get me wrong, I like 4th edition a lot. It's just that in my opinion World of Warcraft can offer the same stuff as 4th. Normally I would be against saying this, but after seeing my Paladin in WoW do the same things that a Paladin in 4th can do it made me wonder, "what exactly makes the games so different?"
I understand the human interaction is a key part of it, but when you're like me, you like to do less roleplaying and do more raiding. If I end up not playing 4th edition for a while, then I will have regretted buying the majority of the player books that are available, and this DDI subscription I have.
I'm not a 4th hater, as I have been very vocal of my support of it. I simply want to discuss what I see as a simple observation.
Inb4infernonlock
My sources inform me that the sourcebook for the WoW pen and paper RPG (feel free to take the time to gather the chunks of your brain off the floor after reading that, we'll wait :D) is essentially 4th ed. reflavored (part of some deal with wizards or something), so that's something. Although personally, I don't see it, admittedly having played WoW for all of 3 hours. I suppose I could see it if 4th had nothing but at-will powers, but as it stands I'm finding myself approaching 4th and WoW with two completely different mindsets (mechanically at least; I'm still /crying next to a dead rabbit for 5 minutes or carrying the gnome wizard around on my back in either case).
Why do the games have to be "so different?"
Coke - Pepsi
Star Wars - Star Trek
CSI - NCIS
Chicago Hope - ER
CBS - NBC - ABC
WoW - DnD 4e(3.x,second, etc.)
Why are they so different? Who copied who, why do we have both, whats the point in drinking watching or playing one over the other? It all boils down to personal preference, the similarities in all the above doesn't make one better then the other, it doesn't make one more original than the other, and it does not make one pointless.
To each his/her own. Why cant we as gamers get along and enjoy the common grounds we have instead of all this name calling and finger pointing.
-Nerp
My sources inform me that the sourcebook for the WoW pen and paper RPG is essentially 4th ed. reflavored
Your sources are either stupid or lying. Take your pick.
when you get down to it , any set of rules could be built into a computer game, there have been plenty of computer games build on D&D rulesets, (none i know of for 4E yet , but i could be wrong ) but 3.5 , 3 and so on.
if the rules are clear and definable then a computer game can be built around them... so then you ask, what makes playing D&D diffrent ?
1. Hanging out in a room with your friends.
2. Being able to think & act outside of the rules..
3. not being restricted to the actions that have been programed for.
4. being able to become your charictor ( my experince with MMO's and video games is that this does not so much happen as your charicter becomes you instead) .
5. unlimitied possibilitys for adventure.
6. Failure & Success have meaningfull consiquences for the continuing of the story
7. (and particulary targeting MMO's) , your char , and group feel more like hero's , more unique and specal. not just 1 of 100's or thousands filling a world of mostly heros ( although that could be the theme of a given D&D world .. going back to # 5)
i could probibily add more and keep going. but i think i made my point.
Because of school, work, and just plain scheduling issues... I haven't played 4th edition for about a month. Don't get me wrong, I like 4th edition a lot. It's just that in my opinion World of Warcraft can offer the same stuff as 4th. Normally I would be against saying this, but after seeing my Paladin in WoW do the same things that a Paladin in 4th can do it made me wonder, "what exactly makes the games so different?"
I understand the human interaction is a key part of it, but when you're like me, you like to do less roleplaying and do more raiding. If I end up not playing 4th edition for a while, then I will have regretted buying the majority of the player books that are available, and this DDI subscription I have.
I'm not a 4th hater, as I have been very vocal of my support of it. I simply want to discuss what I see as a simple observation.
You are way more limited on where you can go and what you do. Your impact on the world in WoW is virtually nothing. YOu have a limted number of adventures"instances" you can do.
In d&d these limitions don't exist. You can do whatever you want and be who ever you want.
WoW is about grinding till the next level and getting phat epics.
D&D is about you, and you can get as little or as much as you put into your PC.
My sources inform me that the sourcebook for the WoW pen and paper RPG (feel free to take the time to gather the chunks of your brain off the floor after reading that, we'll wait :D) is essentially 4th ed. reflavored (part of some deal with wizards or something), so that's something. Although personally, I don't see it, admittedly having played WoW for all of 3 hours. I suppose I could see it if 4th had nothing but at-will powers, but as it stands I'm finding myself approaching 4th and WoW with two completely different mindsets (mechanically at least; I'm still /crying next to a dead rabbit for 5 minutes or carrying the gnome wizard around on my back in either case).
my sources state both Diablo 2 and WoW were both 3rd ed reskinned. take that with a grain of salt.
You are way more limited on where you can go and what you do. Your impact on the world in WoW is virtually nothing. YOu have a limted number of adventures"instances" you can do.
In d&d these limitions don't exist. You can do whatever you want and be who ever you want.
WoW is about grinding till the next level and getting phat epics.
D&D is about you, and you can get as little or as much as you put into your PC.
In WoW I can travel to multiple areas, so I don't think WoW is limited as you say it is. It auto-generates, which does make any significance on what I do minimal. That is understandable mainly because there's a lot of players, which happens to be over 10 million... give or take.
I find that playing WoW can be a good substitue if you don't play 4th ed. on a regular basis, but I'm not saying or implicating to others that they should stop playing 4th. I came to an observation that 4th is a marketed version of WoW, and I have no problems with that. I'm not creating another thread to bash 4th, I created this thread as a rant.
Your sources are either stupid or lying. Take your pick.
Ill-informed would be my guess. I have yet to check out due to the head-asplodeyness I first experienced upon seeing "WoW: the RPG"
Why do the games have to be "so different?"
...
To each his/her own. Why cant we as gamers get along and enjoy the common grounds we have instead of all this name calling and finger pointing.
Get your well-reasoned arguments off mah internets! Grahcomplainrawr!
On the subject though, I will say my first WoW charrie is based on a character concept I had in mah Character Creator stable.
You are way more limited on where you can go and what you do. Your impact on the world in WoW is virtually nothing. YOu have a limted number of adventures"instances" you can do.
In d&d these limitions don't exist. You can do whatever you want and be who ever you want.
WoW is about grinding till the next level and getting phat epics.
D&D is about you, and you can get as little or as much as you put into your PC.
But your still limited in where you can. You are stuck in the WoW world. You can't go in all the buildings in Orgimire, or Iron forge.
You can go anywhere you want in D&D
In WoW I can travel to multiple areas, so I don't think WoW is limited as you say it is. It auto-generates, which does make any significance on what I do minimal. That is understandable mainly because there's a lot of players, which happens to be over 10 million... give or take.I find that playing WoW can be a good substitue if you don't play 4th ed. on a regular basis, but I'm not saying or implicating to others that they should stop playing 4th. I came to an observation that 4th is a marketed version of WoW, and I have no problems with that. I'm not creating another thread to bash 4th, I created this thread as a rant.
There's a lot of things WoW is inferior to compared to DnD, but there is one thing that stands out the most for me in basic mechanics:
I cannot play a Melee Cleric (or Melee Priest) in WoW.
However, I can play a Melee Priest in WAR, does that make 4e = WAR?
Another fundamental thing is that I cannot DM in WoW.
However, I can DM in Neverwinter Nights. Does that make 4e = NWN?
In WoW you can sit around with your friends and complain about mechanics, loot drops, high level content, etc and the game won't change.
If you do that in D&D your DM may get a strange look in his eyes and start rolling dice behind a screen, punctuated by intermittent evil chuckles.
------
In WoW a bucket of paint can be used to...hmmm I am not at all sure, maybe change the color of a tradeskill item.
In D&D a bucket of paint can be used to paint arrows and messages on trees leading adventurers to the ogres cave whom you have bribed with bottle caps to split any loot with.
Or you can paint yourself and run into town yelling at the top of your lungs "Help I have been cursed and only the kiss of the fairest maiden in town will return me to normal! Please!"
Or you could paint your horse and try to get a few more coins for him when you try to sell him as "A rare enchanted breed of stallion from the steppes of the far north"
Or you can put a nice blue hand print on the back of all your cloaks so that when town guard stops you and says "Hey ain't you the guys we kicked out of town yesterday for trying to get the mayors daughter to perform an unnatural act with a blue horse?" You can say "Why no! For we are the Order of the Blue hand and such a thing would offend us greatly!"
4th edition is only limited by a person's imagination. Now if WoW equals the imagination you put into a D&D I feel kinda bad for you
If you compare any RPG and any MMORPG and decide you get the same experience from both, you should stop wasting yours and everyone else's time at the table. They're there to play an RPG. Just stick to the online games, until you perhaps see the reason people play D&D.
If you compare any RPG and any MMORPG and decide you get the same experience from both, you should stop wasting yours and everyone else's time at the table. They're there to play an RPG. Just stick to the online games, until you perhaps see the reason people play D&D.
I've been an on-and-off player for a little over a decade. I think I know what D&D is all about, so don't come at me with that argument. Thank you.
WoW may not be as creative as D&D, and it's shown in some of these posts, but fundamentally the main issue is combat. I enjoy combat so much, I run around in WoW killing random things just for the hell of it. In D&D, I can't do this. If I were to start running up to things and kill a bear, my alignment would eventually change to evil for attacking innocent things. Taking out alignment is not the problem here, so don't get me wrong. I guess WoW is addicting in the sense that you did the same things in Diablo, and Diablo 2. You just go up to stuff, and kill it.
I've been playing 4th for a few months, and the biggest objection I see to it now is that combats take so long. There has been MANY threads about this issues, and yet no one person can come to an agreement on how to fix the problem. In WoW, I don't have this problem. If I get bored in one area, I go to another area and kill more stuff. Also, you complete quests just like any online game, or tabletop.
I've been patient with 4th, and the way it's played. I've been very supportive of the new edition, but my main point is that I can relieve the "roleplaying itch" with WoW as I can with 4th.
Who is changing your alignment to evil for killing bears? Its a bear. Hunters kill them all the time. People need to eat.
And there is a difference between D&D combat and WoW combat. D&D combat is not the same encounter over and over again. And, if your group agreed, you probably could walk away and go to another area if you got bored. NPC's don't just have quests or not and say little to nothing else. Quests are generally something your invested in rather than a means to an end. D&D shouldn't have a set number of moves you go through over and over again in order to get the highest dps(or a prioritized set of moves).
There more options in D&D combat than 'tank go tank, healer stand and heal, dps stand in same place and dps unless this is a boss fight with some sort of special requirements where everyone has to move around and we will all most likely die several times as we try to get it perfectly correct'. D&D normally doesn't grant do overs either.
You don't raid orcus once a week with 10 players who may or may not get loot. When you kill Orcus its probably the end of a career that has been slowly leading up to this very thing and your characters cheer and retire. Its not something you do and another person goes 'we've had orcus on farm for months now'. Thats if you manage to kill Orcus. Maybe you lost to Orcus, he killed the Raven Queen and now he is powerful chaotic evil god and this carries over into further games. When you lose to Kel'thuzad that doesn't happen. (In fact, sometimes you beat Kel'thuzad and then they deus ex machina save him and move Naxxramas to Northrend).
If you compare any RPG and any MMORPG and decide you get the same experience from both, you should stop wasting yours and everyone else's time at the table. They're there to play an RPG. Just stick to the online games, until you perhaps see the reason people play D&D.
I've been an on-and-off player for a little over a decade. I think I know what D&D is all about, so don't come at me with that argument. Thank you.
WoW may not be as creative as D&D, and it's shown in some of these posts, but fundamentally the main issue is combat. I enjoy combat so much, I run around in WoW killing random things just for the hell of it. In D&D, I can't do this. If I were to start running up to things and kill a bear, my alignment would eventually change to evil for attacking innocent things. Taking out alignment is not the problem here, so don't get me wrong. I guess WoW is addicting in the sense that you did the same things in Diablo, and Diablo 2. You just go up to stuff, and kill it.
I've been playing 4th for a few months, and the biggest objection I see to it now is that combats take so long. There has been MANY threads about this issues, and yet no one person can come to an agreement on how to fix the problem. In WoW, I don't have this problem. If I get bored in one area, I go to another area and kill more stuff. Also, you complete quests just like any online game, or tabletop.
I've been patient with 4th, and the way it's played. I've been very supportive of the new edition, but my main point is that I can relieve the "roleplaying itch" with WoW as I can with 4th.
Didn't you just say it's about combat, but WoW relieves your roleplaying itch? The problem with combat in WoW is its controlled by a AI, and not very intuviate, smart, and predicatble. Combat in D&D is not like this and the critters have a bit more life in them
You came here trying to compare WoW to D&D and thats like comparing Poker to Magic. Two differnt games, two differnt set of rules, and two differnt ways of playing. In the end its not a fair comparsion, I like both, but I got tired of the repeativness of WoW and went back to D&D.
Frankly I don't find kill x things a fun object in a gameand doesn't let you roleplay that much.
To each there own. I will never down a person for chosing WoW over D&D, but don't come here trying to compare the two and say WoW is the same cause it they are not
Didn't you just say it's about combat, but WoW relieves your roleplaying itch?
Frankly I don't find kill x things a fun object in a gameand doesn't let you roleplay that much.
They apparently have roleplaying forums on WoW (haven't actually investigated any mind you, but just sayin).
Regardless of the similarity though, it's more than possible to roleplay in WoW. Admittedly, you typically see a lot less results due to it, but nonetheless roleplaying is more about the group than the game. Hell, with the right group, watching paint dry can lead to an amazing narrative.
As a longtime player of both tabletop and multiplayer online games, I would say that they provide entertainment in quite different ways.
The strength of many electronic games, and a MMO in particular, lies in the visceral quality of executing actions in a proper order and timing. This feeling can be heightened through the team tactics required for raid boss fight algorithms. It can also be enhanced with player versus player combat (particularly in team play), which provides a dynamic environment where timing and quick decision making are even more important because the component of rote memorization is diminished. Advancement in this type of game is tied primarily to gear acquisition and anything else which provides raw mathematical power boosts.
In contrast, the strength of a tabletop game lies its malleability and complexity of player involvement. Ostensibly, a tabletop game is entertaining because it can be tailored to fit many different kinds of interesting situations for many different types of interesting characters. With a bit of cleverness and imagination, the system can be used to model any physical, social, or political interaction. Ideally, the situations that players find themselves in are either a consequence of prior actions or a direct choice on the part of the players. Because of this involvement, players should feel more invested in the directions that the game takes. These directions then become fundamental to the development of the player character's motivations and reasoning, which in turn will effect the player's future decisions. The result over time is hopefully a captivating tale of triumph forged in the crucible of trials, obstacles, and loss.
I would urge you to think back over the times through the last decade that you've sat down with your friends over a game of tabletop. Try to remember what made those games entertaining and memorable. If you think about the times when your party laid everything on the line to stop an ancient evil, or the times that victory came at the cost of an ally's life, or the times that the party stuck to what they believed because it made a difference to them and to others, these are all types of experiences that 4th edition can offer again.
But if your fondest memories involved the desire to wander into an area and exsanguinate everything that moves for no other reason than to watch it bleed and collect some experience (and there's nothing wrong with that), I would suggest that World of Warcraft is better suited to that purpose.
So as I've hopefully stated clearly, while both types of game can be entertaining, they provide the bulk of that entertainment through different methods.
As a post script, I should mention that I have been mostly underwhelmed by the role playing capacity provided by the designated World of Warcraft role playing servers. It is true that there are guilds with excellent dedication to role play and developing their own stories within the guild, but these interactions are limited to the confines of the group narrative. The large majority of the role play server population have little to no interest in role playing, and there are sizable groups of those who are role play averse (or even those who join the role play server for the sole purpose of mocking role play). So while I agree that it is possible to role play on a World of Warcraft server, it is an exercise with relatively limited potential.
To be fair, comparing DnD to Wow is the same as comparing it to Halo, or for that matter a good book. While they are set in the fantasy genre, and share some themes. They are not really the same thing.
This thread has raised two issues I simply do no understand. The first is why some people think WoW and D&D are mutually exclusive, that you can play and enjoy one or the other but not both, and the second is why some people feel superior for not playing WoW. Luckily, though I do not understand the latter, it does allow me to easily aremark certain people as not worth paying attention to and thus makes my scanning of these forums somewhat quicker and more efficient.
Who copied who, why do we have both... -Nerp
Computer games copied pen & paper games... chicken...egg... you know the story =)
This thread has raised two issues I simply do no understand. The first is why some people think WoW and D&D are mutually exclusive, that you can play and enjoy one or the other but not both, and the second is why some people feel superior for not playing WoW. Luckily, though I do not understand the latter, it does allow me to easily aremark certain people as not worth paying attention to and thus makes my scanning of these forums somewhat quicker and more efficient.
I hope no one honestly feels the two are mutually exclusive. I certainly don't. Don't like World of Warcraft myself, but I play D&D with people who do.
What I said previously was more because this guy gives me the impression that he doesn't play D&D because of the Role-playing aspect. That he doesn't see there to be an enjoyment in the game other than its battle aspects is where I get this impression. He said that he should just play World of Warcraft, since he feels they are the same.
I apologize for sounding rude and telling-off before. I usually drag on the verbiage, but that time I was thinking that what I said was enough to full explain my mind. Clearly I came across and jerklike. I just mean to say that if you don't see the enjoyable aspects of a table-top RPG that are not matched in an MMORPG, then you are not playing the table-top RPG for the reasons that keep people involved in the game. Perhaps back before MMORPGs came out, people who played Dungeons & Dragons played it for the reasons they now play MMORPGs. In which case, I find it fairly odd that Wizards of the Coast chose for their new version of the game to try and compete with MMOs for attention by streamlining and removing roleplaying content, rather than going the reverse to offer a different perspective.
Play both D&D and World of Warcraft. You have my blessings, in fact. But the two aren't the same, and as much as I don't like to say it, you're almost playing D&D wrong if you can't see what D&D bring that World of Warcraft doesn't. There's no honestly right or wrong way, but you're not tapping the potential.
You wont get your "roleplaying fix" by playing WOW.
You will get your "killing fix" by playing WOW.
I play both, and enjoy them for different reasons.
When we have the "combat fix", WoW sucks major bologna compared to DnD and cannot fulfill that fix.
As said, onne cannot play a Divine Melee Healer (Healadin does NOT qualify, you still have to stay back). One cannot either keep the group on their feet by acting Sgt Gunnery Hartman (in game mechanics, not as a frustrated Raid Leader with anger problems).
And a thousand other crazy combat stuff that WoW can't handle.
There are one thing that WoW has been helpful with. If you follow what they actually say in your quests and read up on the Lore, you have a lot of quest seed for future DnD adventures (and I don't talk about the "gather 10 wolf pelts and get a rusty shield" type of quests)
Did it never occour to people the it was the other way around? That it was WoW that heavily copied concepts from D&D...
Here's two examples I have backing that claim.
I remember when 4th ed just came out. The Wizard got a new spell called "Frostburn", that being a fire and ice spell combined. The Rogue got the ability to attack all enemies around him with "Cloud of Steel".
And wouldn't you know it, two patches right after the release of the PHB1, the WoW Mage got the "FrostFire Bolt" spell and the WoW Rogue got the "Fan of Knives" area attack.
It's always been the other way around from even the earliest days. If you do a little backcheck on other Blizzard games, you'll see that WoW actually got most of its elements from the Diablo series and not Warcraft. Diablo being a classic hack & slash rpg, incorporates many of the basic and fundamental elements that were introduced into the genre by the D&D editions of old. It must never be denied who was the one to inspire the other.
It was actually this grain of truth that let me give WoW a chance and I spent about a year playing before I finally quit out of bordom.
I play (or rather "played") WoW for neither a "killing fix" nor for RPing, I play it to socialize with friends. Several widely-scattered friends, and a few scattered family members, all played WoW and the game was a great way for us to all "get together" (albeit virtually) to have some fiun and shoot the breeze over Ventrilo.
Owing to a number of varied real-world events and influences, this group has largely drifted away from WoW and, because of that, so have I. Sure I could join a raiding guild, kill stuff nightly and get teh "phat lewtz" that some WoW-haters assume are the driving force for all WoW players, but that's not what interests me. WoW is fun and all, but without being able to chat with my mates while playing I've no drive to keep at it.
WoW does have one great advantage over D&D, however, which has nothing to do with the motivations one has for playing either and that is the "anytime, anywhere" aspect. D&D requires planning, it requires setting aside time, it requires everyone being able to get together, and this is often not particularly easy - and sometimes impossible - to accomplish. WoW enables one to hop on any time and play with friends across the street, across the country, or across the world.
I live in Toronto, but through WoW I met and befriended people from Virginia, New york, Florida, Ohio, California, and even Australia. These are people I'd have never encountered otherwise and would certainly never have been able to play D&D with, yet WoW allowed us to draw swords together against common foes, to embark and great and perilous adventures, and to have a blast talking and joking around while doing it. And of course it had the same impact on real-life friends closer to home but with whom it was still problematic to get a D&D game together a lot fo the time owing to real-life getting in the way.
Several of these online friends were D&D players and we were all looking forward to the VTT, to actually be able to get together online for some D&D gaming together, but sadlyWizards completely screwed teh ppoch on that one and now our group has sadly drifted apart. Once we might have been a great VTT success story but now it'll never be. 
I will bring up again you are comparing two things that really isn't fair to compare. Two differnt things. It's like comparing apples to the nasa space program. Well maybe not that extrme, but I love that saying( I have copyrighted so you better qoute it:P)
I will bring up again you are comparing two things that really isn't fair to compare. Two differnt things. It's like comparing apples to the nasa space program. Well maybe not that extrme, but I love that saying( I have copyrighted so you better qoute it:P)
Who is this "you" to whom you are addressing your comments?
In which case, I find it fairly odd that Wizards of the Coast chose for their new version of the game to try and compete with MMOs for attention by streamlining and removing roleplaying content, rather than going the reverse to offer a different perspective.
I have to disagree with this statement. The streamlining of the rules has nothing to do with MMOs, and it is rediculous to say so. This simplifying of the mechanics has been going on since previous editions, if you remember the cumbersome charts of previous editions before 3.5 came out (and 3.5 is greatly streamlined over previous edition rules)
Fact is if they had just released 3.5 now, then people would be saying much the same about it streamlining the rules to appeal to MMO players.
The rules have always been a mechanic in pen and paper games to handle the combat, and since day one they have sought to simplify and streamline them so that they are less obtrusive into the game. In an "imagination game" it is clear that the rules and mechanics should not be the focus of the game play.
This would be akin to claiming that adding an index and glossary to a book is trying to "copying Google" because they can look up which page they will find the information they want in the index. Removing the chore from the DMing or the cumbersome rules of previous editions (such as THaCO) does not make it copying video games.
I will bring up again you are comparing two things that really isn't fair to compare. Two differnt things. It's like comparing apples to the nasa space program. Well maybe not that extrme, but I love that saying( I have copyrighted so you better qoute it:P)Who is this "you" to whom you are addressing your comments?
Anyone that uses my quote :P
I have to disagree with this statement. The streamlining of the rules has nothing to do with MMOs, and it is rediculous to say so.
It is not ridiculous to say so because it borrows significantly from developments seen in MMO's and because MMO's are presently a dominant force in how the demographic of customers spend their liesure time and money.
This simplifying of the mechanics has been going on since previous editions, if you remember the cumbersome charts of previous editions before 3.5 came out (and 3.5 is greatly streamlined over previous edition rules)Fact is if they had just released 3.5 now, then people would be saying much the same about it streamlining the rules to appeal to MMO players.
Okay, if you must then in that first quoted section just replace "streamlining of the rules" with the more general concept of "alteration of the rules" to avoid semantic arguments about streamlining. While WotC may not be attempting to compete directly with WoW and other MMO's that IS where the player base has drifted and it is from there that they are intending to draw customers back. To that end they have adopted much more directly an approach to the game similar to MMO's. True, MMO's got it from D&D, but the changes and developments made by MMO's to D&D produced the 800-lb WoW gorilla. However, not all the changes made for a computer game make for the most broadly appealing tabletop RPG.
Mostly what it comes down to is the natural division between those who want a game controlled by the rules and those who want a game controlled by the DM. MMO's MUST be games that are controlled by the rules. Players interact ONLY with what the rules allow them to interact with. A DM, by contrast can allow interaction with anything and the rules be damned.
The rules have always been a mechanic in pen and paper games to handle the combat, and since day one they have sought to simplify and streamline them so that they are less obtrusive into the game. In an "imagination game" it is clear that the rules and mechanics should not be the focus of the game play.
Changes in combat rules have NOT been made purely for the purpose of "simplification" or "streamlining". Again, it's a matter of competition between a rules-heavy and a rules-lite approach. I believe we are seeing the results of drifting too far to the rules-heavy end.
This is not to say that 4E is heavy WITH rules, only that the game is more oriented around the rules and leaving the DM with less extemporaneous control during the game. I believe this is a direct result of WotC having now published and supported TWO editions of the game in which they are trying to treat D&D rules UNLIKE a cooperative interaction of the participants imagination, but instead actively limiting that in favor of a competitive-approach with codified rules that cannot and will not be argued or altered.
As for being the focus of gameplay look at ANY version of D&D. Divide the rules into combat rules and non-combat rules. See how overwhelmingly large the combat rules section is - for ANY version? Recent versions have provided stronger mechanics for handling non-combat interactions between characters which are presently still easy to ignore but otherwise non-combat interaction is where half of the game lives. There is naturally less bother and less ability to rules-ify that becuase it is simply too vastly full of options that cannot be quantified. Combat, on the other hand, comes to be what largely defines the functionality of any RPG. It is through the lens of combat that we see how the rules want our characters to interact with their environment. In a rules-light game one gets the impression that the rules don't particularly care and it's up to we players to define our own approach. In a rules-heavy game the rules begin to dictate to us how our characters are expected to act. A little of that is good in comparison to an utterly undirected approach to the game where being able to make ANY choice leaves some players unable to choose at all. But a LOT of that is bad in comparison to a game where my characters role is not so hard-coded - where other players wouldn't ever register the complaint that I don't know how to play my own character and live up to the expectations the rules have assigned for him (something I see all too frequently on 4E boards).
I play world of warcraft, and honestly, it borrows alot of concepts from DND and is kind of proud of it, hell they had a blurb on their main site when Gary gygax died saying how much he influnced the genre and the like. But the games are nothing like the same, i play world of warcraft to experience *that* story, use *that* battle system, and play *that* game. One cannot be better than the other because they don't rest in the same category.
Ultimately, it's *not* DND, its a game much like any other.
> significantly from developments seen in MMO's
The MMOs I've seen all have far MORE complicated rules under the hood than D&D does because they've got CPUs to handle all of those rules.
D&D tries be as streamlined as possible, not because of MMOs, but because the real live players of the game don't (yet) have math coprocessors embedded in their brains.
I suffer from the fact, that tactically, in combat, 4th Ed is the same game as WoW. And I play Wow already. I know they don't have the same exact rules, but they use the same narrow role-based style. Wow, lets you play each character class in between 1 and 3 ways and 4th Ed gives you roughly the same scope. I mean, Fighters now have abilities to hold aggro as standard (and are probably expected to use them), like somehow all bad guys are naive enough to attack the the guy they can't really hurt in favour of the ones who are tearing strips off them. That's great for a computer game, but gibberish in real role play.
For anyone who played both 3.5 and Wow for a long time, 4th Ed was clearly a merger of ideals between the two. I think it impossible that anyone who knew both games well didn't see that.
Anyway, I already play Wow, and playing it more slowly with physical dice roles instead of graphics doesn't really do it for me. I mean, by introducing the ideas of contollers or tanks, you're changing the focus from class to role. So now you pick a role, say striker, then you pick a flavour, say mage. As I say, I do that in Wow already.
I suffer from the fact, that tactically, in combat, 4th Ed is the same game as WoW. And I play Wow already. I know they don't have the same exact rules, but they use the same narrow role-based style. Wow, lets you play each character class in between 1 and 3 ways and 4th Ed gives you roughly the same scope. I mean, Fighters now have abilities to hold aggro as standard (and are probably expected to use them), like somehow all bad guys are naive enough to attack the the guy they can't really hurt in favour of the ones who are tearing strips off them. That's great for a computer game, but gibberish in real role play.
For anyone who played both 3.5 and Wow for a long time, 4th Ed was clearly a merger of ideals between the two. I think it impossible that anyone who knew both games well didn't see that.
Anyway, I already play Wow, and playing it more slowly with physical dice roles instead of graphics doesn't really do it for me. I mean, by introducing the ideas of contollers or tanks, you're changing the focus from class to role. So now you pick a role, say striker, then you pick a flavour, say mage. As I say, I do that in Wow already.
Care to point out chapter and page number in the PHB (or any 4e book for that matter) that includes the word "aggro"?
I suffer from the fact, that tactically, in combat, 4th Ed is the same game as WoW.
At the very least this is wrong because WoW is not turn based. And having played both, this makes a huge difference in tactics.
like somehow all bad guys are naive enough to attack the the guy they can't really hurt in favour of the ones who are tearing strips off them. That's great for a computer game, but gibberish in real role play.
Sound like you completely misunderstand how defenders work. For one, some enemies will still ignore the defender if they're stupid enough. For two, what defenders do is give the enemies the devil's choice; they can attack the barbarian who's beating their face and take a -2 penalty as well as a beating from the fighter, or they can try to hit the guy with 21 AC.
This is going to harsh to accept RPJesus, but cast and cooldown times are to Wow what rounds are to DnD. At least as far as tactics is concerned. Every combat involves a tank at the front, a healer and the back and 2-3 varieties of damage dealer. While that can be incidentally true in 3.5, the game isn't built so only that tactic really works. But instead of keeping away from these formulaic groupings, 4e is filled with abilities that encourage exactly and almost only this tactic.
And are you seriously pitching that a 4E fight is designed and expected to play out with five creatures attacking the defender and utterly ignoring everyone else the way WoW does?
This is going to harsh to accept RPJesus, but cast and cooldown times are to Wow what rounds are to DnD. At least as far as tactics is concerned.
It's nothing of the sort. For a simple example, I tend to play the tank characters. So I tend to end up ankle deep in enemies and need to heal. In D&D, I can typically decide to heal or not based on my HP when my turn comes up. With WoW, I've had to adapt to start healing well before I actually need it to account for having to switch to the mouse and click my character and then the time it takes to actually cast the spell. Plus, in D&D I can second wind and run the expletive away (sure the enemies can pursue me, but they're not going to be continuing to deal damage to me, and I don't have to take it for 10 seconds before I can start running.
This is going to harsh to accept RPJesus, but cast and cooldown times are to Wow what rounds are to DnD. At least as far as tactics is concerned. Every combat involves a tank at the front, a healer and the back and 2-3 varieties of damage dealer. While that can be incidentally true in 3.5, the game isn't built so only that tactic really works. But instead of keeping away from these formulaic groupings, 4e is filled with abilities that encourage exactly and almost only this tactic.
In the Napoleonic era, battles would often involve line infantry in front, with artillery in the rear. Surgeons could often be found in the rear, and cavalry were often in the flanks.
:lightbulb:
Infantry = Defender/Tank, and Artillery/Cavalry = Striker and Controller. Surgeons = (primitive, non-magical) Healers.
I suffer from the fact, that tactically, in combat, 4th Ed is the same game as WoW. And I play Wow already. I know they don't have the same exact rules, but they use the same narrow role-based style. Wow, lets you play each character class in between 1 and 3 ways and 4th Ed gives you roughly the same scope. I mean, Fighters now have abilities to hold aggro as standard (and are probably expected to use them), like somehow all bad guys are naive enough to attack the the guy they can't really hurt in favour of the ones who are tearing strips off them. That's great for a computer game, but gibberish in real role play.
For anyone who played both 3.5 and Wow for a long time, 4th Ed was clearly a merger of ideals between the two. I think it impossible that anyone who knew both games well didn't see that.
Anyway, I already play Wow, and playing it more slowly with physical dice roles instead of graphics doesn't really do it for me. I mean, by introducing the ideas of contollers or tanks, you're changing the focus from class to role. So now you pick a role, say striker, then you pick a flavour, say mage. As I say, I do that in Wow already.
Can you honestly comparing a turn-based game to a real time game as the same. That like comparing Heros of might and magic to warcraft.
Two very differnt games that happen to share a few of the same quailties.
Playing Wow is fine, and so is D&D, but try going to a wow board and say its almost like D&D and all hell would break loose
All editions of D&D followed the same example, a striker, a tank and a healer they were just not called that. Now that the classes are lumped into "jobs"its very obvious you can make the connection to the two games.
Previous edition I believe didn't let the classes work togther well or make the players work as a team. With 4th edition teamwork plays a much more critcal role
Previous edition I believe didn't let the classes work togther well or make the players work as a team
AD&D Magic-Users casting Fireball had to learn to work as a team.
RPJesus, the tactics are the same. Tank at front to attract attention, healer to keep him alive and 2-3 other people doing damage. That is the tactic that makes WoW work and that 4e tries to encourage above all else. If you stray from that you are in trouble. 3.5 had a lot of other viable configurations of parties which led to a far larger variety of options; or 'tactics' if you will.
Entropy, i just have no idea what point you are trying to make. I understand it, but the pertinence escapes me.
Rian, i do indeed equate, both in result and partly in execution, the cast/cooldown mechanism of Wow to rounds in DnD. But the key word is still Tactics, not specific abilities or their representation. You may not think at that level, but from my lofty perch, it is the same game just at different speeds. It you can numerically master one, the other is no problem. As for who recognises the similarities between 4e and Wow, they can be calculated by the space in the Venn diagram where 'people who play Wow' meet 'people who play 3.5 DnD' and 'people who have tried 4e'.
Mind, World of Warcraft is a derivative of several other games running back over time. Blizzard doesn't hold the patent for MMOs, believe me. WoW is the example most people can think of, usually the under-25 crowd.
World of Warcraft is not different from EverQuest, for example, in that you have the same party layouts. Tanks up front, mages and healers in the back, and DPS sandwiched in between, so they can come around and go visit the backside of the mob once it's engaged.
In D&D, we don't need a whole party to beat up a single mob of our own level, one character can do that just fine by themselves.
In D&D, we can heal when necessary, and not most of a minute ahead of time. Character dead? It'll cost you. You don't just respawn.
In D&D, we don't need to mess with a three-hour timer to use abilities, or five days passing in game time in that interval. Our buffs aren't going to go down in the middle of a fight because the timers expired
In EverQuest, the monster doesn't get a free shot if you walk away. In WoW, the monster will keep attacking you even if the other guy behind him is tearing chunks out of him. No intelligence.
3.5 had a lot of other viable configurations of parties which led to a far larger variety of options; or 'tactics' if you will.
Care to give examples of these variety of options that is not based on "one man shows"?
This is going to harsh to accept RPJesus, but cast and cooldown times are to Wow what rounds are to DnD. At least as far as tactics is concerned. Every combat involves a tank at the front, a healer and the back and 2-3 varieties of damage dealer. While that can be incidentally true in 3.5, the game isn't built so only that tactic really works. But instead of keeping away from these formulaic groupings, 4e is filled with abilities that encourage exactly and almost only this tactic.
In the Napoleonic era, battles would often involve line infantry in front, with artillery in the rear. Surgeons could often be found in the rear, and cavalry were often in the flanks.:lightbulb:
Infantry = Defender/Tank, and Artillery/Cavalry = Striker and Controller. Surgeons = (primitive, non-magical) Healers.
GASP! That means the Napoleaonic Era is Wow in real life, and like centuries ago! We must go troll their forums telling them their war is like WoW!
Seriously, the idea of a defender, a healer, a controller, and a damage dealer is not new and rolls have been in D&D for a while with similar set-up. Rolls were less so in 3rd because casters were overpowered past a point and thus didn't need anyone else. Its also a mechanic that makes tactical sense (as provided via the historical reference) and is a way to balance the game.
RPJesus, the tactics are the same.
Tactics and gameplay are two very very different things. As people have said before, for an extremely simple example, in WoW you have to start healing about 30 seconds before you actually need healing. Similarly, you can move and heal at the same time (well, on the same turn anyway, which is basically the same thing).
If you stray from that you are in trouble.
This really isn't true in either case. Admittedly I've only spent like 10 hours playing WoW, but save for accidentally aggroing too many monsters at once, I seem to be pretty effective soloing things with my pally and occasionally pulling my buddy's mage out of trouble when his mana supplies run low.
Similarly, in 4th ed. any party combination is viable. One session had a rogue, an avenger, a wizard and 2 bards, and we did fairly well for ourselves.
Unless you're talking about "protect the squishies" in a more general sense, in which case, your assertions may be true, but hold no particular relevance here (unless you want to claim advance wars and WoW are the same game).
3.5 had a lot of other viable configurations of parties which led to a far larger variety of options; or 'tactics' if you will.
"Casters, take care of the monsters, melee, play with this ball."
Sorry RP, but a full fledged wow player will agree that their tactics (in combat) and thier game play experience are within an ace of being interchangable terms. And whatever that tactic is, is deifined entirely by their class. 4e, while not so extreme, heads in this direction very strongly compared to 3.5.
And, as you can probably guess, my experience of 3.5 in recent groups has not lead me to conclude that casters are overpowered at all. Though admittedly we tend not to play groups into the higher levels.
"Casters, take care of the monsters, melee, play with this ball."
RPJesus, I must strongly protest against this statement, for it goes against all I stand for.
Clerics are Melee too, so what you should be saying is "Casters, take care of the monsters, non-casters, get ready to pick up the treasure for them."
RPJesus, the tactics are the same. Tank at front to attract attention, healer to keep him alive and 2-3 other people doing damage. That is the tactic that makes WoW work and that 4e tries to encourage above all else. If you stray from that you are in trouble. 3.5 had a lot of other viable configurations of parties which led to a far larger variety of options; or 'tactics' if you will.
Entropy, i just have no idea what point you are trying to make. I understand it, but the pertinence escapes me.
Rian, i do indeed equate, both in result and partly in execution, the cast/cooldown mechanism of Wow to rounds in DnD. But the key word is still Tactics, not specific abilities or their representation. You may not think at that level, but from my lofty perch, it is the same game just at different speeds. It you can numerically master one, the other is no problem. As for who recognises the similarities between 4e and Wow, they can be calculated by the space in the Venn diagram where 'people who play Wow' meet 'people who play 3.5 DnD' and 'people who have tried 4e'.
I suppose in a sense we could comapre wow to Monoply, and D&D can be compared to poker cause they all use stragety
"Casters, take care of the monsters, melee, play with this ball."
RPJesus, I must strongly protest against this statement, for it goes against all I stand for.Clerics are Melee too, so what you should be saying is "Casters, take care of the monsters, non-casters, get ready to pick up the treasure for them."
I also protest. I keep the melee combatents at home cleaning my laundry, and washing the dishes
Sorry RP, but a full fledged wow player will agree that their tactics (in combat) and thier game play experience are within an ace of being interchangable terms. And whatever that tactic is, is deifined entirely by their class.
I suppose, but this isn't always the case. I'm prolly in the minority but I play WoW for the lulz (like attempting to recreate my whacky steampunk character Quince Bannon or being quite tempted to play an aesthetically blind revenant a la Mr. Magoo)
4e, while not so extreme, heads in this direction very strongly compared to 3.5.
I'm fairly sure this statement is made of wrong. Assuming for the sake of argument that 3.5 is balanced, the wizards get to start with around 4 hp. They could die to an oversized housecat. Thus it's generally a good idea to put the 16 hp barbarian between them and the displacer beast (ooh, and the oft -ignored suggestion that you roll for additional hp.). In 4e conversely, a warlock could very well have the highest HP in the party.
I also protest. I keep the melee combatents at home cleaning my laundry, and washing the dishes
But then who will stand between you and the 1% of being able to cast wish agains? Sure they can't deal any serious damage to you, but it still hurts.
> and 2-3 other people doing damage. That is the tactic that
> makes WoW work and that 4e tries to encourage above all else.
You keep making this claim about 4E tactics, but I've yet to see you establish with any credibility that it's how 4E tactics are expected to play out or do play out in general. Simply asserting it over and over does not make it true.
"It works out that way in my group!" doesn't cut it either - it doesn't work out that way in the groups I've played 4E in.
It's also expressly contrary to the developers' own commentary and the analysis of I-don't-know-how-many others on these boards: 4E defenders are rarely going to be able to lock down every last enemy like WoW requires, and also unlike WoW tanks, PC defenders (and 4E PCs generally) are not durable enough to take that kind of focused fire, especially on a sustained basis. Likewise, 4E non-defenders are quite capable of taking hits, unlike WoW non-tanks who pretty much go splat the moment something swings at them.
Even the 'typical' party presented in official adventures (starting back with Keep on the Shadowfell) has two defenders and one of each other role, simply because one defender can't really hold the line all by himself.
Guys, the whole 'Defender - Striker - Controller - Leader' concept has been worked out around 600BC.
It's all described in Sun Tzu's The Art of War
So yeah, of course both WoW and D&D will use those concepts, they are PART OF how a battle works. They are the tried and true way since the old ages, and they are present in just about every wargame in existance.
That's like saying D&D is like WoW because both feature the english language and the color blue.
Oh, goody, goody! The snowball of another skirmish within the Edition War has been cast over Mount Everest! Superb! I was just getting comfortable in the thought that we were tentatively getting along. Oh well, what's life without a little upset?
Is it just me, or does it seem like this thread might have been started for troll-ish intentions? And, maybe, we took it hook, line and sinker?
Take care, friends.
Yes but the smells of trolls is like sweet candy to me and I can help myself for going along with it
My sources inform me that the sourcebook for the WoW pen and paper RPG is essentially 4th ed. reflavoredYour sources are either stupid or lying. Take your pick.
Exactly.
I have the WOW pen and paper sourcebook and it is re fluffed 3.5.
psst. check post #8 on page 1. i think it dispells the "4th ed is wow/diablo" and [smarm]clearly[/smarm] proves that 3rd ed is the lesser, MMORPGLOLOMGWTFBBQ-inspired, game
Yes but the smells of trolls is like sweet candy to me and I can help myself for going along with it
...okay...maybe you have a point...
Take care, friend.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg. A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here, and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg. A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here, and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.
you brought it up on yourself! you force me to use the seldom brought out [smarm] tag... it's on like donkey kong. queensbury rules, of course.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg.
I enjoy WoW, but if you get the same experience from it that you do a tabletop RPG then I pity you your poor experience of tabletop RPGs.
A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.
So you post things like this as evidence that everyone except you is unreasonable?
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here,
I'm also begining to wonder why you do so.
and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.
Garbage in, garbage out.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg.I enjoy WoW, but if you get the same experience from it that you do a tabletop RPG then I pity you your poor experience of tabletop RPGs.
A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.So you post things like this as evidence that everyone except you is unreasonable?
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here,I'm also begining to wonder why you do so.
and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.Garbage in, garbage out.
Poor experience in tabletops? I've been gaming long enough to know good from bad, and you don't seem to post anything but garbage anyways.
Poor experience in tabletops? I've been gaming long enough to know good from bad, and you don't seem to post anything but garbage anyways.
I seem to be having the opposite experience. I generally find Jayne to be thoughtful in his replies, if occasionally knee-jerk on certain topics. On the whole, we all have our knee-jerk topics, so I can hardly fault him for that.
Me, I dislike Rules Lawyers and twinks intensely, which is probably why I seem to find them in my games. Min/Maxers suck the fun right out of things, rather like Jayne's DMPCs
I've sounded off on this topic myself, and whilst I personally find WoW boring as can be, I hardly fault other players who come to Tabletop from such backgrounds. For me, RPGs are about the social time with others, and not about how many mobs you can slay with your Uber-pally Hammer of Death +22. If you're not getting more from a Table game than that, then perhaps it is time to sell your books, and buy a year's subscription to WoW, or EverQuest, or Star Wars Glaxies, or Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Whatever floats your boat.
What I find incomprehensible is the nerve it takes to come into a tabletop games Forum, essentially espouse an MMORPG (any one), and then expect not to catch flak about it. If I went to Blizzard's Forums and said the reverse, they'd moderate the thread insidce an hour for all the flaming I'd get, and probably ban me to boot.
For the other posters here, I say Bravo for the level of restraint and self control you've shown in not roasting this guy on his own spit.
Poor experience in tabletops? I've been gaming long enough to know good from bad, and you don't seem to post anything but garbage anyways.
I seem to be having the opposite experience. I generally find Jayne to be thoughtful in his replies, if occasionally knee-jerk on certain topics. On the whole, we all have our knee-jerk topics, so I can hardly fault him for that.
Me, I dislike Rules Lawyers and twinks intensely, which is probably why I seem to find them in my games. Min/Maxers suck the fun right out of things, rather like Jayne's DMPCs
I've sounded off on this topic myself, and whilst I personally find WoW boring as can be, I hardly fault other players who come to Tabletop from such backgrounds. For me, RPGs are about the social time with others, and not about how many mobs you can slay with your Uber-pally Hammer of Death +22. If you're not getting more from a Table game than that, then perhaps it is time to sell your books, and buy a year's subscription to WoW, or EverQuest, or Star Wars Glaxies, or Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Whatever floats your boat.
What I find incomprehensible is the nerve it takes to come into a tabletop games Forum, essentially espouse an MMORPG (any one), and then expect not to catch flak about it. If I went to Blizzard's Forums and said the reverse, they'd moderate the thread insidce an hour for all the flaming I'd get, and probably ban me to boot.
For the other posters here, I say Bravo for the level of restraint and self control you've shown in not roasting this guy on his own spit.
I think I've disagreed with a lot of people on this board about a good number of issues. The problem with posting anything that would be contrary to the average WOTC board member, is that I've noticed a common pretentious behavior.
Me: "I get the same outcome of playing WoW as I do playing D&D."
Others: "You're playing it wrong!!!", "You don't know what you're talking about!!", "People like this guy don't even know what D&D is about." I've been playing on-and-off for over a decade, and to think that these same people would be supportive of me if I had come here to say something to their liking.
I'd rather have people disagree with my opinions, rather than for me not to bring up my opinions at all.
I'd rather have people disagree with my opinions, rather than for me not to bring up my opinions at all.
So then, we should all go over to Blizz's Forums and say odd things. Gotcha.
You are entitled to your opinions, but you should be able to guess what others' opinions will be from the nature of the board. Man walks into a Vegan restraunt and asks for a hamburger, the result is... Predictable.
Here, no different.
You're welcome to try and create a debate. In the roughly quarter-century I've been at this, I've been in enough of them.
Unfortunately, you appear to have started the wrong debate in the wrong place, and then got snotty when the consensus didn't agree with you.
Well, at least they aren't violent...
It's funny because I get the exact same feeling from a game of DnD as I do from watching re-runs of the Ghostbusters cartoon. Not the one with the actual Ghostbusters, the fake one. Exactly. The. Same. You'd think they'd be different because they're, like, totally different things that have very little in common with each other, but no. Exactly the same experience.
Poor experience in tabletops? I've been gaming long enough to know good from bad, and you don't seem to post anything but garbage anyways.
I seem to be having the opposite experience. I generally find Jayne to be thoughtful in his replies, if occasionally knee-jerk on certain topics. On the whole, we all have our knee-jerk topics, so I can hardly fault him for that.
Me, I dislike Rules Lawyers and twinks intensely, which is probably why I seem to find them in my games. Min/Maxers suck the fun right out of things, rather like Jayne's DMPCs
I've sounded off on this topic myself, and whilst I personally find WoW boring as can be, I hardly fault other players who come to Tabletop from such backgrounds. For me, RPGs are about the social time with others, and not about how many mobs you can slay with your Uber-pally Hammer of Death +22. If you're not getting more from a Table game than that, then perhaps it is time to sell your books, and buy a year's subscription to WoW, or EverQuest, or Star Wars Glaxies, or Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Whatever floats your boat.
What I find incomprehensible is the nerve it takes to come into a tabletop games Forum, essentially espouse an MMORPG (any one), and then expect not to catch flak about it. If I went to Blizzard's Forums and said the reverse, they'd moderate the thread insidce an hour for all the flaming I'd get, and probably ban me to boot.
For the other posters here, I say Bravo for the level of restraint and self control you've shown in not roasting this guy on his own spit.
I think I've disagreed with a lot of people on this board about a good number of issues. The problem with posting anything that would be contrary to the average WOTC board member, is that I've noticed a common pretentious behavior.
Me: "I get the same outcome of playing WoW as I do playing D&D."
Others: "You're playing it wrong!!!", "You don't know what you're talking about!!", "People like this guy don't even know what D&D is about." I've been playing on-and-off for over a decade, and to think that these same people would be supportive of me if I had come here to say something to their liking.
I'd rather have people disagree with my opinions, rather than for me not to bring up my opinions at all.
I think the few people who have acutally said that have outweighed the people who are decent to you.
The problem began when you said WoW and D&D are basically the same and anything you can do in one game you can do in the other. This is not true, for the reason we have already mentioned.
Oh really? Then besides human interaction, tell me what exactly would make D&D 4th different from WoW. Of course there are going to be differences, but I find overbearing similarities between the two. It's not a bad thing to say that D&D has now been influenced by MMORPG's, and that to draw in new customers they've established a totally different system to appease MMO players. Many people I have talked to here in the SF Bay Area have seen it, and know what I'm talking about.
To me D&D isn't independent of outside influence anymore, and for me being a long-time player it's something I've noticed. I wish I could talk more about this, but I need to drive my neighbor's daughter to school. I'll be back later on.
Limitless possibilities. It's said before you know, D&D is only limited by your imagination. If you see no difference between WoW and D&D, you either aren't trying hard enough, or you don't have enough imagination to make it into something great.
Oh really? Then besides human interaction, tell me what exactly would make D&D 4th different from WoW. Of course there are going to be differences, but I find overbearing similarities between the two. It's not a bad thing to say that D&D has now been influenced by MMORPG's, and that to draw in new customers they've established a totally different system to appease MMO players. Many people I have talked to here in the SF Bay Area have seen it, and know what I'm talking about.To me D&D isn't independent of outside influence anymore, and for me being a long-time player it's something I've noticed. I wish I could talk more about this, but I need to drive my neighbor's daughter to school. I'll be back later on.
Yes, because you have to kill hundreds of the same monsters waiting for that rare drop of loot; and it takes 25-100 PCs to take down a single elder dragon; and when you talk to NPCs they only ever say the same thing over and over again; and quests are clearly marks by mysterious exclamation marked over the heads of said NPCs; and because no matter how many times you kill all evil it will respawn within 3 minutes or at most a week.
Sir, stop talking. You're only digging your own grave. Calling yourself a long time player and spewing this nonsense doesn't only make you look like a troll, but a troll that can't see the difference between blue and purple.
Limitless possibilities. It's said before you know, D&D is only limited by your imagination. If you see no difference between WoW and D&D, you either aren't trying hard enough, or you don't have enough imagination to make it into something great.
This is the truth. in D&D, or any tabletop RPG, you can turn it into whatever you want it to be. I have players who barely did any role playing before 4e, they are hardcore WoW players, and even they can appreciate the freedom of playing D&D over a videogame. These guys, who have been playing D&D 4e for less than a full year and barely got their feat wet with 4 weeks of a 3.5 mod, these guys can see the difference between D&D and MMOs by a clear mile. They got into so much that each one of them is taking their own turn on the DM seat.
The bottom line is the problem is you, your group, and your DM (maybe that's you again). 3.5 did not do non-combat rules any better than 4e. Someone, or everyone, in this group just doesn't want to step out of the box. Now, if you are incapable of doing that and enjoying yourself with it, then go ahead and get rid of your 4e books and never tread these forums again. The only thing you came looking for on this board was some kind of justification for your own failure, someone to reaffirm your ill-conceived notions. That won't happen.
You have no one and nothing to blame but yourself and your group for not having fun.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg. A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here, and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.
What, exactly, am I talking about which requires me to have an idea of it?
Take care, friend.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg. A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here, and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.
What, exactly, am I talking about which requires me to have an idea of it?
Take care, friend.
Ouch my brains meat hurt. I need to go back to remedial english again. me reading skills is bad. I have to have a adult 'splain what you said :P
JK
Yes, because you have to kill hundreds of the same monsters waiting for that rare drop of loot; and it takes 25-100 PCs to take down a single elder dragon; and when you talk to NPCs they only ever say the same thing over and over again; and quests are clearly marks by mysterious exclamation marked over the heads of said NPCs; and because no matter how many times you kill all evil it will respawn within 3 minutes or at most a week.
Sir, stop talking. You're only digging your own grave. Calling yourself a long time player and spewing this nonsense doesn't only make you look like a troll, but a troll that can't see the difference between blue and purple.
I started playing with the original Temple of Elemental Evil, thank you very much. As far as WoW, yeah you may have a point where they just stand around doing nothing. As far as killing hundreds of the same creature, you're wrong. If I were to play WoW, I wouldn't be killing the same creature over and over hundreds of times because they wouldn't give you XP after achieving a certain level. I believe this happened in D&D 3rd where such a rule was instituted. Both have SIMILARITIES that play off of each other. D&D has had an influence on a lot of fantasy games, but WoW has had an impact on D&D 4th. To deny such a thing would be outright stubborness.
I stayed out of the Edition Wars because I didn't find it productive to argue down other players who knew what they were talking about. I respected their views, and a lot of them left. It bothered me a lot to see them go because these were people that I saw post on-and-off throughout me being here on this board since 2003. I forgot my exact join date, so it's hard to remember. The new members here that eventually took over don't have the same mentality, and when a debate comes up insults are thrown around.
If you look at the PHB, you've got the tanks (Paladin, Fighter) that work very similar to the Warrior and Paladin in WoW. It seems odd to me that Warlocks are even present in the NEW D&D edition, despite them having been in WoW for some time. Strikers in 4th also seem to be too similar to the DPS combatants that WoW has in place. Maybe I made an unfitting remark when they could have been the same, but there are striking similarities that prove what I'm talking about. I spent a good amount of money within 5 months on 4th since I started playing this edition this year, but to say I didn't have a good time playing isn't necessarily my group's or my fault.
Limitless possibilities. It's said before you know, D&D is only limited by your imagination. If you see no difference between WoW and D&D, you either aren't trying hard enough, or you don't have enough imagination to make it into something great.
This is the truth. in D&D, or any tabletop RPG, you can turn it into whatever you want it to be. I have players who barely did any role playing before 4e, they are hardcore WoW players, and even they can appreciate the freedom of playing D&D over a videogame. These guys, who have been playing D&D 4e for less than a full year and barely got their feat wet with 4 weeks of a 3.5 mod, these guys can see the difference between D&D and MMOs by a clear mile. They got into so much that each one of them is taking their own turn on the DM seat.The bottom line is the problem is you, your group, and your DM (maybe that's you again). 3.5 did not do non-combat rules any better than 4e. Someone, or everyone, in this group just doesn't want to step out of the box. Now, if you are incapable of doing that and enjoying yourself with it, then go ahead and get rid of your 4e books and never tread these forums again. The only thing you came looking for on this board was some kind of justification for your own failure, someone to reaffirm your ill-conceived notions. That won't happen.
You have no one and nothing to blame but yourself and your group for not having fun.
I've never even played 3.5, so your argument there has no relevance to me. You have players who can play WoW, and 4th edition. Good for them. Bravo. I don't need to address any of your argument because it's done with insults, and it's shown that people lose arguments when they start insulting others. You're only trying to get me to respond in a negative manner.
It seems odd to me that Warlocks are even present in the NEW D&D edition, despite them having been in WoW for some time.
Warlocks were in 3.5 (don't know about 3.0).
It seems odd to me that Warlocks are even present in the NEW D&D edition, despite them having been in WoW for some time.
Warlocks were in 3.5 (don't know about 3.0).
The concept of the Warlock in Dungeons and Dragons has existed for a number of years, and in general Fantasy for much, much longer. A Warlock is a male Witch (esp in Christian dogma).
Taking that a step further, the Warlock is an evil Human(or person) that has entered into a pact with evil forces, and uses them to further the desires and goals of whomever they signed the pact with.
The idea isn't new, nor are the powers displayed in the 3.5 Warlock class, any one of a number of homebrew 2e classes, or the 4e Warlock any different. Blizzard does not have the corner on the much of anything in terms of generic core concepts. Just the fluff.
Myself, I'm really getting tired of the endless comparisons between every game in existence and WoW. I played WoW for awhile, and I can't honestly think of a more colossal waste of time and money.
Limitless possibilities. It's said before you know, D&D is only limited by your imagination. If you see no difference between WoW and D&D, you either aren't trying hard enough, or you don't have enough imagination to make it into something great.
Well, " !" to you to 
Also, look back at my reference to Sun Tzu for the why and how of Defenders and Strikers.
Troll: 8
Guys just drop it, this one is an obvious troll. Anyone offering an opinion or even fact that contradicts what he has presented is accused of being insulting/childish/etc. Let it go. and now Kirby
<(' '<)
(>' ')>
<( ' ' )>
<(' '<)
(>' ')>
\(' ')/
complete arcane came out a month or two before WoW... darn WoW stealing our warlocks :P
Troll: 8
Guys just drop it, this one is an obvious troll. Anyone offering an opinion or even fact that contradicts what he has presented is accused of being insulting/childish/etc. Let it go. and now Kirby
<(' '<)
(>' ')>
<( ' ' )>
<(' '<)
(>' ')>
\(' ')/
What is that kirby..kill myself? Ok got it
It's (one of) the Kirby Dance! Arms go left, arms go right, arms go out. Arms go left, arms go right, arms go up!
I'm hanging out with some friends, and have been drinking a "few" beers. If I were to be a troll, why exactly would I have my DDI subscription? You guys are full of inconsistency with your ideas as to why I quit D&D 4th. Once again,, I've been drinking so don't mind me. thank you.
I'm hanging out with some friends, and have been drinking a "few" beers. If I were to be a troll, why exactly would I have my DDI subscription? You guys are full of inconsistency with your ideas as to why I quit D&D 4th. Once again,, I've been drinking so don't mind me. thank you.
What do you expect with a troll post like that, DDI or no DDI?
Oh btw, I've noticed I've been playing a lot of Dragon Age: Origins... I've noticed DAO offers the same experiences as playing WoW, with some mature rating added and without of the ridiculous Disney-like caricatyres.
In D&D, you sit with your friends, socialize face-to-face, and the only limits of the game are your imagination. WoW is addicting, it can make your health decline. I advise you to quit. That's what I did. Believe me, it is so much more rewarding to reach level 30 in D&D than level 80 in WoW. Plus, school is much more important. Quit WoW. Believe me, an mmorpg is NOT worth it.
In D&D, you sit with your friends, socialize face-to-face, and the only limits of the game are your imagination. WoW is addicting, it can make your health decline. I advise you to quit. That's what I did. Believe me, it is so much more rewarding to reach level 30 in D&D than level 80 in WoW. Plus, school is much more important. Quit WoW. Believe me, an mmorpg is NOT worth it.
Don't listen to him. I'll give you the first ten days free, but after that you pay. wait..this does sound like addication....maybe blizzards is on to something
Really couldn't be bothered to read more than the OP, sorry. Just making a quick comment before this thread dies.
Even if I had two games, one played online and one a tabletop RPG, with almost exactly the smae features, rules etc. I'd still choose the RPG and not the MMO.
Why? Because I like social interaction, because I like letting my imagination go where it wants without the restrictions of a machine, because I want to create my own stories and not just play someone elses.
Not that MMOs are bad. If I had money & time I'd play 'em too. But if I could only play one, I'd go RPG. Everytime.
Don't listen to him. I'll give you the first ten days free, but after that you pay. wait..this does sound like addication....maybe blizzards is on to something
Not particularly. From what I've heard their trial system seems to be;
"Want a sample of this cake?"
"Sure"
"Here you are"
"... This is a cup of sugar."
"Yes, if you want to try the rest of the cake you'll have to invest in a few boxes of it."
Don't listen to him. I'll give you the first ten days free, but after that you pay. wait..this does sound like addiction....maybe blizzards is on to something
Not particularly. From what I've heard their trial system seems to be;
"Want a sample of this cake?"
"Sure"
"Here you are"
"... This is a cup of sugar."
"Yes, if you want to try the rest of the cake you'll have to invest in a few boxes of it."
Except it isn't sugar, it's cocaine.
Except it isn't sugar, it's cocaine.
I've never really seen that angle (then again, I'm immune to the internet), but my main point is they seem to follow the terrible business model of "Free trials should be terrible" presumably under the misguided assumption that it will incentivize people to purchase the full version when it's more likely to turn them off the game forever (For example, the one specific thing I remember is that it caps you at level 20, which is really right about the time things start to get awesome) .
Except it isn't sugar, it's cocaine.
I've never really seen that angle (then again, I'm immune to the internet), but my main point is they seem to follow the terrible business model of "Free trials should be terrible" presumably under the misguided assumption that it will incentivize people to purchase the full version when it's more likely to turn them off the game forever (For example, the one specific thing I remember is that it caps you at level 20, which is really right about the time things start to get awesome) .
Could you imagine if someone were to farm a character to a high level before the trial subscription was up? I'm sure people in another country would be rotating shifts just to make some money off of a virtual character. For some reason or another, people in the U.S. like to buy things already made for us instead of making it ourselves.
WoW is addicting,
Nope.
it can make your health decline.
Nope.
Gaming in general can be addicting (they have rehab clinics for gamers for a reason) and sitting behind the computer too long is bad for your health
That said, it's as likely to happen over minesweeper as it is over WoW, or any other game. They have addicts for a lot of games.
WoW is addicting,
Nope.it can make your health decline.
Nope.
You make very valid counterpoints Anyone can become addicated to most anything. It could be a chemical addication, mental addication, psyclogical addication.
Gaming in general can be addicting (they have rehab clinics for gamers for a reason)
Videogaming does not meet the criteria for addiction. It can have a compulsive aspect to some people, but that is not the same thing.
and sitting behind the computer too long is bad for your health
A lack of physical activity will have deleterious effects on ones health, but a computer is not required adn WoW is not the cause.
That said, it's as likely to happen over minesweeper as it is over WoW, or any other game. They have addicts for a lot of games.
Half true. See comments earlier re. addiction.
You make very valid counterpoints
Yes, I do. Thanks for noticing.
Anyone can become addicated to most anything.
No, they can't. Some people can become addicted to some things.
It could be a chemical addication, mental addication, psyclogical addication.
These are all quite different things. Referring to them as the same thing serves to both muddy those differences and to dilute the actual meaning of the term "addiction".
Let the countdown to someone posting a dicitonary defintion of "addiction" commence: 10…9…8…
Let the countdown to someone posting a dicitonary defintion of "addiction" commence: 10…9…8…
HAY GUYS AM I DOIN IT RITE?
:3
Videogaming does not meet the criteria for addiction. It can have a compulsive aspect to some people, but that is not the same thing.
What are the criteria? I figured that anything that you have actual rehab-clinics for could be considered addicting, but I might be wrong.
Edit: Post withdrawn.
A very broad, handy criterion for an "addiction" is that it has to cause physiological withdrawal symptoms when withheld from the "addict." This is, of course, a simplified definition, but I have found in the past that it helps explain it simply, if not completely.
There are of course, many different definitions of "addiction," thanks to so many dictionaries being present in the world. It is best to remember that most dictionaries track general usage, instead of specific (i.e., medical) usage. Even doctors disagree on the exact definition of "addiction."
It is worth noting that the American Psychological Association classifies what the general public thinks of as "psychological addictions" as "impulse control disorders" instead. Presumably, this is to free up the word "addiction" for use on physiological syndromes.
Once again, I'll repeat that the precise definition of "addiction" is not universally agreed upon, even by people who "know what they're talking about." (i.e., medical doctors, psychologists, etc.)
How dare we have a voice of reason on these boards.
Fixed it for you :P
Edit: Emoticon
Fixed it for you.
You get me wrong, you made a lot of sound sense. it was a joke that a lot people just spout off random and won't listen to reason. I wanted to give you props for having a good head on your shoulders
My apologies, I did it as a joke. Since you had quoted the entirety of my post, I felt I could safely delete mine and act sarcastically offended...but I forgot to signal the sarcasm. Whoops.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled Discussion!
Why do the games have to be "so different?"
Coke - Pepsi
Star Wars - Star Trek
CSI - NCIS
Chicago Hope - ER
CBS - NBC - ABC
WoW - DnD 4e(3.x,second, etc.)
Why are they so different? Who copied who, why do we have both, whats the point in drinking watching or playing one over the other? It all boils down to personal preference, the similarities in all the above doesn't make one better then the other, it doesn't make one more original than the other, and it does not make one pointless.
To each his/her own. Why cant we as gamers get along and enjoy the common grounds we have instead of all this name calling and finger pointing.
-Nerp
More like D&D 1st Ed, 2nd Ed, 3.0 Ed, 3.5 Ed, then WoW, then 4th Ed. Better questions might be: Why play WoW when its just a copycat video game that ripped off D&D? Or why ask this at all on this forum if not to troll? Such an obviously hot button topic approached by the OP with childlike innocence (im not a hater, I am not a troll...no really...I swear)...I call shinanegans. Nice troll tho, got lots of responses. 7/10 for the effort.
If I was trolling, I wouldn't have been an active member previously in support of 4th edition before. I find that I get the same experience from WoW as I do playing a tabletop rpg. A lot of people wanted to scrutinize what I was saying, and took it up the butt.
What I HAVE wondered about is why I continue to post here, and all I get is counter-posts from people who don't really have any idea what they're talking about.
What, exactly, am I talking about which requires me to have an idea of it?
Take care, friend.
Ouch my brains meat hurt. I need to go back to remedial english again. me reading skills is bad. I have to have a adult 'splain what you said :P
JK
It's alright. If you look at it long enough with your eyes crossed and you tongue sticking out, it'll look like a 3D airplane.
Take care, friend.