D&D 4E Find the Anime/Video games in 4e

[Xethreau]

I am not convinced that D&D is becoming too much like a video game, or anime, but I'll play devils advocate and see what happens. BTW, anime is a noun, not an adjective, so when I use it in quotes, I am using it as an adjective.

- New rules focus on game play, not simulation
- Party roles are as good as saying "Tanker" and "Blaster" which is reminicent of WoW
- Antropromorphic dragons seem "anime," along with cat-folk and the rest
- Dragonborn = Fanboy/power gamer race
- Swordmage = Fanboy/power gamer class
- This picture
- Vancian casting represented simulation; loss of it represents gamism
- Elves are fey, which is kind of "anime"
- Elves have higher movement speeds, which is "anime"
- Less spoken focus on wizard 'utility' spells, now they seem like blaster mages form "WoW"
- Rogues bouncing arround all over the place is very "anime"
- Fighters getting powers, in some eyes, is reminiscent of DBZ
- Warlock: inspired by WoW, and strongly influenced by anime


But that's all I've got for now. If this thread were made three months ago, it would have been easier to make. I'm sorry if any of those sound rude, but I have to say that I disagree with the opinion of/ like most the above changes.

 

[D_E]

I would identify three things as being anime*/video game influenced. I would like to note that this does not mean that I'm saying these things are bad.

1) Per-encounter resources: Already mentioned. Arises from the 5 minute workday and the fact that when you look around at video games/movies/anime/whatever you don't see people having to hit the hay after one tough fight. Games especially expect you to be able to clear levels without having to rest more than once or twice. Games accomplish this by mostly giving you more resources per day and more oportunities to recove said resources besides sleeping for 8 hours, although a few (like WoW, I believe) have regenerating resources which are essentially per encounter.

2) Flamboiant names: Already mentioned. I think this was influenced by anime.* Many Japanese names for things sound kinda wonky (IMO) when directly translated into English, and names like "Dragon's Tail Cut" sound (to me) like they're trying to emulate that kind of sound.

3) Big moves for Fighters etc: In 3rd Ed, at least, there wasn't a whole lot of flashy things for Fighters and such to do, and it sounds like 4th will give them more flashy, limited use powers. I think this was influenced in a big way by external factors. In particular, in my very limited experiance Asian movies/etc don't draw as strong a line between magic/not magic as is customary in Western movies/etc. So swordsmen can do things like jump 60ft straight up, etc.

*NOTE: "anime" here used by a guy who knows very little about it.

 

[Zweischneid]

Even though the chronology-nazis will pick on me again, but I'll have to point out that character advancement by "killing & looting" is very, very, very, very video-gamey.

Maybe D&D did it before games like Ultima Online or Everquest or even computers, but Roleplaying as a whole had long moved on to story-based exp. and shaken off the ridicule of taking equipment from opponents as main source of character wealth in the late 80s and 90s before D&D brought this (now videogamey) gaming relic back to the table with 3.0.

 

[Xethreau]

Even though the chronology-nazis will pick on me again, but I'll have to point out that character advancement by "killing & looting" is very, very, very, very video-gamey.

Maybe D&D did it before games like Ultima Online or Everquest or even computers, but Roleplaying as a whole had long moved on to story-based exp. and shaken off the ridicule of taking equipment from opponents as main source of character wealth in the late 80s and 90s before D&D brought this (now videogamey) gaming relic back to the table with 3.0.

It's interesting you say that, because I am only familiar with this phenomina in D&D and MMO's. Most videogames I play do have "pick ups" from defeating an enemy, sometimes, but you can't loot their body like you can in these games. I honestly find this distasteful on multiple levels.

 

[Wormwood]

. . . before D&D brought this (now videogamey) gaming relic back to the table with 3.0.

Back to the table?

It never left the table, as far as D&D is concerned.

 

[Doug McCrae]

3) Big moves for Fighters etc: In 3rd Ed, at least, there wasn't a whole lot of flashy things for Fighters and such to do, and it sounds like 4th will give them more flashy, limited use powers. I think this was influenced in a big way by external factors. In particular, in my very limited experiance Asian movies/etc don't draw as strong a line between magic/not magic as is customary in Western movies/etc. So swordsmen can do things like jump 60ft straight up, etc.

I sort of agree with this. Until Bo9S/4e D&D melee types have never really had per encounter abilities. One round was pretty much the same as the next. But there still needs to be an extra element for fighters to become truly anime.

To properly simulate fights in fiction (Not just anime. Movies, superhero comics and wrestling are like this too) there has to be some sense of buildup throughout the battle, a gathering of adrenaline or fury or whatever, which is released in a massive fiery cloud of blazing doom late on, probably in the final round. (NOT round 1 - very important). Storyfied fights.

In this area WoW does a better job of simulating fiction than D&D, it's how WoW's warriors and rogues work, building up rage or combo points respectively before they can unleash hell.

 

[Zweischneid]

Back to the table?

It never left the table, as far as D&D is concerned.

Maybe, but like it or not, D&D itself had left the table for a few years back than.

D&D 3.0 (and by extension 4.0) might use an old brand and claim continuity for marketing purposes, but they are still games published in a larger enviroment that is preceding them as well as influencing them. The whole point of this thread is that new versions of D&D do not draw inspiration exclusively from old versions of D&D but other sources as well.

So when the 3.0 designers decided to stick with exp-for-kill and gold-as-loot as central convention, they did so in this context.

What's more, if 4.0 will, as has been said, go out of it's way to attract new and younger players, it seems highly unlikely that the exp-for-kill and gold-as-loot design at the very core of the game is in there soley to cater to some old 70s-RPG-Vets who failed to notice history pass by outside the D&D updates. If they'd believe a change would appeal to new players, they'd change it in a heartbeat.

If D&D had it first, than videogames killed it and took it's stuff.. sorry. It is a videogame convention now.

 

[kennew142]

Even though the chronology-nazis will pick on me again, but I'll have to point out that character advancement by "killing & looting" is very, very, very, very video-gamey.

Maybe D&D did it before games like Ultima Online or Everquest or even computers, but Roleplaying as a whole had long moved on to story-based exp. and shaken off the ridicule of taking equipment from opponents as main source of character wealth in the late 80s and 90s before D&D brought this (now videogamey) gaming relic back to the table with 3.0.

When exactly did the concept of killing things for xp and taking their stuff for wealth ever go out of D&D? Other games may not use it, but D&D is (and always has been) the most popular tabletop rpg out there. If D&D was doing it (and they were), it never left the table.

OTOH, I wouldn't be sad to see them go. Characters in my D&D campaigns level when it is time to level. Such a system may not suit the tastes of the average gamer very well. I don't know.

but like it or not, D&D itself had left the table for a few years back than.

TSR may not have published anything in months, and appeared to be on the verge of collapse, but D&D was still the most popular tabletop rpg. I would love to see any statistics that would gainsay this fact. I have been involved in organizing conventions since the 1990s and I never saw any other table rpg come even close to D&D in popularity. I say this despite the fact that I was Runequest/GURPS guy in those days.

 

[IanB]

My copy of the 3.5 XPH says it was published in April 2004.

WoW didn't come out until November, 2004.

Now, I know that Everquest and perhaps Dark Age of Camelot may have existed before these points, but I'm not sure if either of those games had the "Re-tool" thingie.

DAOC had respecs well before that, yes. A couple different kinds, even.

 

[Wormwood]

Maybe, but like it or not, D&D itself had left the table for a few years back than.

Really? When?

Because even though 2e made some cursory mention of 'xp for achieving goals', the bulk of xp was---and always has been derived from killing things.