Forked Thread: GTS 2009 D&D Seminar - 4e video game

[hong]

Thinking about it a bit more, milestones could stand to be interpreted as... well, milestones. Ie, checkpoints that you pass on the way to clearing a level/map. This would be a bit more organic than the plain "every 2 encounters" rule.

 

[Cadfan]

Sorry, I totally forgot the actual attachment.

 

[Gort]

I would dearly love to see a 4e video game that was multiplayer and turn-based (for combat only). I would play that to death with my friends.

I do think that 4e is a more video-game friendly rules set than 3e or previous, just because of stuff like spells - managing them, the horrible effects they can have (oh, you let the enemy wizard get off a spell? You die!) and having hundreds of the damn things to choose from at any given moment. Also, not having to manage huge numbers of buff spells.

However, I'd hate to see a 4e Neverwinter Nights game - it was a shame to see D&D part-bastardised into a real-time model.

 

[xechnao]

Thinking about it a bit more, milestones could stand to be interpreted as... well, milestones. Ie, checkpoints that you pass on the way to clearing a level/map. This would be a bit more organic than the plain "every 2 encounters" rule.

It could work in a map where areas were linked with encounters. You would have to have a picture of the map though beforehand (in ja you had indeed) but the problem is that these milestones would not be reactivable if you revisited the map unless the random encounters were always tied to the same specific areas: not a good idea IMO.

 

[xechnao]

I would dearly love to see a 4e video game that was multiplayer and turn-based (for combat only). I would play that to death with my friends.

This could be the same for many people around here. The question is if it could be done in a way to appeal to a larger audience today .

 

[hong]

It could work in a map where areas were linked with encounters. You would have to have a picture of the map though beforehand (in ja you had indeed) but the problem is that these milestones would not be reactivable if you revisited the map unless the random encounters were always tied to the same specific areas: not a good idea IMO.

The random encounters in BG were always tied to the same specific areas too. In fact, this is how a lot of CRPGs work.

And yes, if you went back to a map, the cleared milestones wouldn't reactivate. This is because I'm not a fan of XP farming. You, of course, may disagree (a _lot_ of ppl like XP farming).

 

[xechnao]

Sorry, I totally forgot the actual attachment.

Well there is a way to control this freedom: by making it random. If you consume consumable resources such as expensive arrows and potions but go away without finishing certain objectives, when you come back part of the things you had to clear up could be repopulated and this time you may miss the resources you had available to consume last time. I guess there is some fine tuning in these matters to find the right balance and make the game playable within certain limits.

 

[xechnao]

The random encounters in BG were always tied to the same specific areas too. In fact, this is how a lot of CRPGs work.

And yes, if you went back to a map, the cleared milestones wouldn't reactivate. This is because I'm not a fan of XP farming. You, of course, may disagree (a _lot_ of ppl like XP farming).

When I saying specific I mean much more specific and stable than what you had in BG. Milestone specific: clearing the guards of a gate (that will always have to be there to defend the gate even if you killed them the last time. Since combats in 4e are more complicated and beg for more variety, having to repeat the same combats -on the same disposition of terrain, etch- would be a problem IMO.

 

[Cadfan]

Well there is a way to control this freedom: by making it random. If you consume consumable resources such as expensive arrows and potions but go away without finishing certain objectives, when you come back part of the things you had to clear up could be repopulated and this time you may miss the resources you had available to consume last time. I guess there is some fine tuning in these matters to find the right balance and make the game playable within certain limits.

You could do that, but you're really just sacrificing story in exchange for pseudo freedom.

The freedom you're getting is the ability to rest and retreat at will, even when its not realistic. The cost is that you have to make a game where unrealistic things like that happen all the time.

Hong- the XP farming thing is solvable, just don't give XP the second time through. Track which monsters are respawns, and make them empty calories.

I wouldn't do that, personally, since I'd rather not have random monsters who respawn. I'd rather have more realistic enemy behavior than respawning orcs.

 

[hong]

When I saying specific I mean much more specific and stable than what you had in BG. Milestone specific: clearing the guards of a gate (that will always have to be there to defend the gate even if you killed them the last time. Since combats in 4e are more complicated and beg for more variety, having to repeat the same combats -on the same disposition of terrain, etch- would be a problem IMO.

Well, you did make specific mention of "random encounters".

You appear to be conflating set-piece encounters with random ones. The set pieces can certainly be as complicated as you like, and they wouldn't repeat. The random ones, however, can be exactly that: random. 5 monsters that you meet in the middle of nowhere, with no fancy terrain or other features.