Search results

I predict it'll occur next May, when the new PH comes out. Is he going to be gone that long?

David "Zeb" Cook shouted over his cubicle at Wolfgang Baur, and asked him for a good German-derived word for humans with fiendish blood. Wolfgang Baur said, "tieflings?" From the German teufel, or devil. And history was made. Tieflings first appeared in the Planescape Campaign Setting in...

I'm actually arguing from the other direction. I'm not saying the DI won't have an upper limit; I'm saying that MMORPGs don't actually have a lower limit. If only six people played WoW, it would still be an MMORPG. Therefore, the word "massively" is a trivial distinction.

Very well; I can agree with that. But your post appeared so late in the thread that, if it wasn't intended to be a response to anything said recently, you should have quoted the post it was intended to be a response to. Otherwise, misunderstandings can and will result.

Why not? At what point does the number become "massive?" I don't find that distinction persuasive because it's so arbitrary.

I wouldn't call it a CRPG (because the rules adjudication is human-based rather than computer-based), but I would call it an MMORPG (because thousands of people can use the tabletops at once, even if only up to ten interact at one time).

Is it an RPG? If not, you're just trolling.

Who said anything about hate? I think perhaps some people think calling the virtual tabletop an MMORPG is a criticism of some kind. It wasn't intended that way. I'm just trying to use a common word to describe a common experience. I don't have any opinion on 4e or D&D Insider. It sounds like...

If your TiVo plays RPGs, I agree that you can play MMORPGs on it. If it doesn't, you're not being particularly relevant or witty.

It seems a very different experience, but if you want, we can define a play-by-post game as an MMORPG. It seems an odd idea, but if that's what you want, I'll go along with it.

No, you still don't seem to be understanding the argument. I'm not saying that 4e is itself an MMORPG. It's a tabletop RPG. But if you play it in a virtual environment, it is. Similarly, 3e (or Vampire, or GURPS, or whatever) isn't an MMORPG, but if it's played on a server where a bunch of...

The distinction is a matter of degree, not of kind. There's no real difference. No, because they're purely text-based.

Those are text-based, not graphical, so that's a real difference. I feel, therefore, safe in answering "no." Your other distinctions are less well-defined. WoW has people defining plotlines and encounters, creating the landscape and the world -even if they don't call them DMs, that's...

They are if you play them online, in a graphical environment. If you're playing them on your own, actual table, they aren't. That's not news; it's just obvious. The only "double-standard" is in claiming that one kind of multi-player modem-based RPG experience is an MMORPG and the others...

I have no idea what you're talking about, but if they enable multiple people to play RPGs together in a virtual environment, yes, of course they are. That's the definition of an MMO.

The Dragon and Dungeon parts obviously aren't MMORPGs. They're e-magazines. The parts of the Digital Initiative that allow you to play RPGs online, completing quests and interacting with other gamers in a shared virtual environment, just as obviously are. I have trouble imagining the semantic...

No, eladrins are not similar to aasimars. Eladrins are the race that personifies chaotic good, as demons personify chaotic evil and devils personify lawful evil. They're full-blooded outsiders. Aasimars are humans with the blood of celestials in their veins, the descendents of half-celestials...

I rather doubt they'll ever "do anything" with Greyhawk, not unless Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk sells beyond all expectations. It sounds like the "default world" will be some vague, make-it-up-as-we-go-along place with a mixture of Greyhawk, real-world, and completely new elements...

I think you've mispelled Factol Hashkar's name (as "Haskar"). I see that you've attempted to translate some of the 2e classes into 3e terms (thief becomes rogue, and Hashkar's 0-level sage is replaced with a note that says merely "NPC?"), but for some reason 2e HD numbers for monsters like A'kin...

The devourer originally appeared in the Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendix III, incidentally, not the Monster Manual. It could still have been inspired by Mortal Kombat, of course.