-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 4E Not going to 4e
- Thread starter Hunter In Darkness
- Start date
Hunter In Darkness
First Post
i think what morn means is if its played on a pc like a pc game then its not dnd. i am no sure what u meant but the way u said it makes it sound like u want a pc game that plays like dnd. and if that is what u want then he is right that would not be dnd. playing on is fine but if u cant play around a table with real dice and book..dead tree books that is.
then its really not dnd or any pnp rpg really its a pc game .
then its really not dnd or any pnp rpg really its a pc game .
Ah, I see what you're saying. That's what I was trying to say about WotC missing the boat here while at the same time acknowledging that my view is pretty heretical.
I don't think D&D necessarily means always sitting at a table with an entire group. I know this is not everyone's idea of D&D but if they are serious about expanding ALL aspects related to increasing participation in D&D by non-D&D players, one aspect they are missing out on is the online gaming community. Although it would not be nearing as immersing as the "real" PnP D&D, I do know that people who are not "gamers" who have played NWN2, WoW, etc., often ask me about D&D.
They rarely start gaming in a PnP version though because of various different reasons but they express a certain amount of interest in it that isn't captured by WotC currently. I think a computer-based game/mechanism could increase the pool of potential players and the cross-migration of PnP to an online game and vice versa. I mean seriously, according to many of the posters here, WoW is a serious passion of theirs. Why let WoW capture a market segment if you don't have to?
I don't think D&D necessarily means always sitting at a table with an entire group. I know this is not everyone's idea of D&D but if they are serious about expanding ALL aspects related to increasing participation in D&D by non-D&D players, one aspect they are missing out on is the online gaming community. Although it would not be nearing as immersing as the "real" PnP D&D, I do know that people who are not "gamers" who have played NWN2, WoW, etc., often ask me about D&D.
They rarely start gaming in a PnP version though because of various different reasons but they express a certain amount of interest in it that isn't captured by WotC currently. I think a computer-based game/mechanism could increase the pool of potential players and the cross-migration of PnP to an online game and vice versa. I mean seriously, according to many of the posters here, WoW is a serious passion of theirs. Why let WoW capture a market segment if you don't have to?
megamania
Hero
There are many reasons I doubt I will switch to 4e
1) Money to start over....again
2) Nothing wrong with 3.5 that I have not already house ruled
3) So many things I have not done with Pres Classes and Templates already
4) The reoccuring thought that this is being done strictly to continue Hasbro/WoTC pockets
5) The sheer disappointment of losing two magazines about my favorite hobby.
1) Money to start over....again
2) Nothing wrong with 3.5 that I have not already house ruled
3) So many things I have not done with Pres Classes and Templates already
4) The reoccuring thought that this is being done strictly to continue Hasbro/WoTC pockets
5) The sheer disappointment of losing two magazines about my favorite hobby.
Ogrork the Mighty
Explorer
I don't think a gaming group connected by the internet is all that different from a gaming group sitting around a table, assuming the technology is there to duplicate tabletop discussion, maybe even visuals, dice rollers, etc. And I think this will work wonders for being able to put together a gaming group.
Just because it's online doesn't mean it's not D&D. I think once you get video game graphics going on (with animation), then you're moving into the realm of a video game (like NWN).
I really like the idea that D&D is going high(er) tech. It's all the other 4E crap that I don't like.
Just because it's online doesn't mean it's not D&D. I think once you get video game graphics going on (with animation), then you're moving into the realm of a video game (like NWN).
I really like the idea that D&D is going high(er) tech. It's all the other 4E crap that I don't like.
Dristram
First Post
I know this discussion has gone off topic a bit, but my take on a computer based D&D is thus.
I can play poker on a computer, over the internet, but I still find it more enjoyable to sit around a table with a bunch of friends with physical cards. I can play many different board games on the computer, but I find enjoyment sitting at a table with family and friends moving pieces on a board. It's the same with D&D.
D&D is a roleplaying game. In order to really get the most out of roleplaying, you need to be in person with the ones you're roleplaying with. If all D&D is to you is going from one combat to the next, then a video game can fulfill your desires. But true roleplaying can't be done over a computer. How do I define true roleplaying? Talking as your character in 1st person including body language and special voices. I find most modern players of D&D talk mostly in the 3rd person and are quick to roll a d20 afterwards. That’s fairly easy to replicate in a video game, but 1st person roleplaying is not. And traditional D&D roleplaying is 1st person roleplaying with dice rolls being used sparingly, instead allowing the DM to judge for himself how well he felt the player’s character did. A lot of that has been lost and so video game style games can more easily replicate the modern way of playing D&D.
I can play poker on a computer, over the internet, but I still find it more enjoyable to sit around a table with a bunch of friends with physical cards. I can play many different board games on the computer, but I find enjoyment sitting at a table with family and friends moving pieces on a board. It's the same with D&D.
D&D is a roleplaying game. In order to really get the most out of roleplaying, you need to be in person with the ones you're roleplaying with. If all D&D is to you is going from one combat to the next, then a video game can fulfill your desires. But true roleplaying can't be done over a computer. How do I define true roleplaying? Talking as your character in 1st person including body language and special voices. I find most modern players of D&D talk mostly in the 3rd person and are quick to roll a d20 afterwards. That’s fairly easy to replicate in a video game, but 1st person roleplaying is not. And traditional D&D roleplaying is 1st person roleplaying with dice rolls being used sparingly, instead allowing the DM to judge for himself how well he felt the player’s character did. A lot of that has been lost and so video game style games can more easily replicate the modern way of playing D&D.
Greylock
First Post
Ogrork the Mighty said:
To me, the biggest draw of D&D is the social interaction. I don't think the effect of the sudden appearance of a fire-breathing woolly mammoth summoned unexpectedly by a PC can have quite the same impact without the oohs and ahhhs and people jumping out of their chairs.
Or the look on a DM's face when he's about to really spring something on us, be it a bad guy or yet another appearance of his famous wandering monk who shows up in every campaign. Or my old friend Ashley, who could imbue every character with incredible life, without saying a word. Or the break on the patio where we razz Don about his new date. Or the drawing out of the kitty to see if we have enough for pizza. Or Wes bringing his new gal to surprise us, or even better when the DM lets her guest play some BBEG. Or the agreement that everyone must break early, but as the night gets more exciting we all coax a few more minutes of game out of the clock until we are racing home before our alarm clocks go off. Or shaking the hand of someone you've only known before as a name and avatar online who's driven two hours to play in your game.
I doubt that playing via Skype, or Fantasy Grounds, or the DI can have the same feel. It's not D&D to me.
Darrin Drader
Explorer
I'm kind of out of the D&D design loop as I'm more interested in focusing my skills and interests in the direction of the fiction market at this time, but I'll go ahead and chomp on this.
While I support and agree with the notion of streamlining the system to make it easier to prep and play, I feel that a lot of the changes I've been reading about seem pretty arbitrary and really unnecessary. The changes to elves and tieflings particularly, while being mostly cosmetic, don't really do anything to make either race more or less desirable to play. It seems as though the only thing this will accomplish is sundering the verisimilitude of existing campaign worlds as there are sudden differences in races that "have always been that way." Why? I just can't fathom the logic.
So to answer the question, no, I probably won't be embracing 4E any day soon. But I'm OK with that. I have enough 3E and D20 books to provide PHBs for all my players and have supplemental material and adventures for the rest of my life. I see no reason to repurchase all of the books I already own in the format of a new edition. I'm already playing True20 instead of D20 Modern, and I happily use 3.5 D&D for my fantasy needs. If anything, this means that I can save money by canceling my subscription to Pathfinder, ignore the RPG shelf at the local bookstore, and otherwise walk away from the business side of D&D.
The next time you see my name attached to a new book, it will be in the novels section, not the gaming section.
For what it's worth, I think the online tools they'll be offering are a very good thing. It's a shame they never took the necessary steps to make them possible with 3rd edition.
While I support and agree with the notion of streamlining the system to make it easier to prep and play, I feel that a lot of the changes I've been reading about seem pretty arbitrary and really unnecessary. The changes to elves and tieflings particularly, while being mostly cosmetic, don't really do anything to make either race more or less desirable to play. It seems as though the only thing this will accomplish is sundering the verisimilitude of existing campaign worlds as there are sudden differences in races that "have always been that way." Why? I just can't fathom the logic.
So to answer the question, no, I probably won't be embracing 4E any day soon. But I'm OK with that. I have enough 3E and D20 books to provide PHBs for all my players and have supplemental material and adventures for the rest of my life. I see no reason to repurchase all of the books I already own in the format of a new edition. I'm already playing True20 instead of D20 Modern, and I happily use 3.5 D&D for my fantasy needs. If anything, this means that I can save money by canceling my subscription to Pathfinder, ignore the RPG shelf at the local bookstore, and otherwise walk away from the business side of D&D.
The next time you see my name attached to a new book, it will be in the novels section, not the gaming section.
For what it's worth, I think the online tools they'll be offering are a very good thing. It's a shame they never took the necessary steps to make them possible with 3rd edition.
Last edited:
Henry
Autoexreginated
Greylock said:
There's a certain amount of dilution of original concept you can get with it still feeling the same or similar; but that point is different for many people. The ultimate experience, tabletop gaming a la the way people usually do it, really has no parallel; once you leave the table, and start going remote, or using a computer interface to play, then you have something similar, but no longer "same as." Don't get me wrong, I've had some stellar chat based or online rpg-based experiences in my days, and they still work, even if it's not the same. The point for me where it completely breaks down is playing with strangers, or playing with people you haven't "vetted" as at least acquaintances.
Once you lose the element of playing with people you at least like, it's no longer an RPG experience that I'm interested in.
I'm another gamer who currently has very little interest in switching to 4E. To date I haven't seen anything that seriously piques my interest.
To megamania's list ...
I'll add a few other points that contribute to make me less than excited about 4E
5a) DDI has little to no value for me and is nothing but a reminder of how an integral and fantastic part of my hobby was eliminated to make room for an embarrassingly poor E-version.
6) Developers who don't seem to be in touch with what, as a game and customer, I'm actually looking for
7) Very poor marketing effort that has generated very little buzz in my area and with my fellow gamers
Some of these are important (in my eyes) and others are of less importance, but all of them are reasons why the switch to 4E still hasn't brought me any excitement. Having said that we are still looking at switching to other games in 2008, but 4E isn't even on our radar right now.
To megamania's list ...
I'll add a few other points that contribute to make me less than excited about 4E
5a) DDI has little to no value for me and is nothing but a reminder of how an integral and fantastic part of my hobby was eliminated to make room for an embarrassingly poor E-version.
6) Developers who don't seem to be in touch with what, as a game and customer, I'm actually looking for
7) Very poor marketing effort that has generated very little buzz in my area and with my fellow gamers
Some of these are important (in my eyes) and others are of less importance, but all of them are reasons why the switch to 4E still hasn't brought me any excitement. Having said that we are still looking at switching to other games in 2008, but 4E isn't even on our radar right now.
Similar Threads
