D&D 4E 4E is like WoW (NOT!)

[hong]

But they have no power that that forces the monster to hit people?

Nope. In practice, you can often predict what the AI is going to do anyway, and this lets you use tank 'n spank tactics like in other games. However, it isn't because bodyblocking is infeasible.

 

[GSHamster]

? Bodyblocking the monsters works fine in Guild Wars.

Isn't Guild Wars purely instanced, though? Collision detection is possible, just computationally intensive, especially when latency is involved. Also, it leads to serious griefing issues in general gameplay. ("Your level 1 character needs to go through this door? I'm sorry, I think my level 100 guy was here first.")

As for the original topic, to me it seems that WotC is actually going to great lengths to enhance 4E as a positional, turn-based combat game, deliberately setting it apart from the real-time, threat-based MMOs.

There are similarities between 4E and MMOs, but mostly in small things. Big picture-wise, 4E seems completely different, which is a good thing. I like WoW, but D&D needs to be it's own game.

 

[Leatherhead]

Nope. In practice, you can often predict what the AI is going to do anyway, and this lets you use tank 'n spank tactics like in other games. However, it isn't because bodyblocking is infeasible.

Ah, ok then. So they found a way to include clipping, and don't rely on powers to force monsters to attack people, kudos to them.

 

[Gloombunny]

But they have no power that that forces the monster to hit people?

The closest thing to "taunt" in Guild Wars is for a warrior to use a power that slows a monster's movement, such as the "Hamstring" sword attack, and then have the squishy run the heck away. The monsters are smart enough to realize that they can't catch up and will turn their attention to the warrior who they can actually reach.

Since much of WoW, including most of the times you need to be tanking stuff, is instanced too, I don't know why they couldn't do something similar. I think mainly they just didn't want to.

 

[hong]

Isn't Guild Wars purely instanced, though? Collision detection is possible, just computationally intensive, especially when latency is involved. Also, it leads to serious griefing issues in general gameplay. ("Your level 1 character needs to go through this door? I'm sorry, I think my level 100 guy was here first.")

Well, bodyblocking in GW PvE is only players vs monsters. You can move through your buddies just fine, and similarly monsters can move through each other (but unaligned NPCs block everyone, which can be annoying at times). In PvP, everyone blocks everyone else, so smart positioning becomes much more important. But yeah, the instancing helps; in PvE you only have 8 PCs (12 for some of the top-end dungeons) and in PvP the largest battles are 12v12. A long way from the 40-man raids in WoW.

 

[AllisterH]

You know what's actually funny?

THe way a round is run and how monsters are designed, that's PURE M:TG. After 8 years after acquiring it, WOTC is turning D&D into Magic:The Gathering.

The exception based design
The increased emphasis on phases
The breakdown of what happens on your turn

I was setting up for a game of M:TG and my SO mentioned that the PHB lite's round breakdown seemed familiar to something she had read or been told.

Yet few people seem to realize this.....Oh, those WOTC kids are wily

 

[Jack99]

You know what's actually funny?

THe way a round is run and how monsters are designed, that's PURE M:TG. After 8 years after acquiring it, WOTC is turning D&D into Magic:The Gathering.

The exception based design
The increased emphasis on phases
The breakdown of what happens on your turn

I was setting up for a game of M:TG and my SO mentioned that the PHB lite's round breakdown seemed familiar to something she had read or been told.

Yet few people seem to realize this.....Oh, those WOTC kids are wily

Maybe because most of us don't play Magic?

When that is said, I love the new breakdown of the round, when things happen etc, so I frankly don't care, even if it comes from something that I hate, just on principle.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Maybe because most of us don't play Magic?

When that is said, I love the new breakdown of the round, when things happen etc, so I frankly don't care, even if it comes from something that I hate, just on principle.

I agree, stuff like "damage happens at the start of your turn, you get to throw off ongoing effects at the end of your turn" are good universal rules that help prevent arguments and slowdowns figuring out when fast healing/ongoing damage comes into effect etc. So long as the things characters actively do such as minor/move/standard actions can still be done in any order then D&D is taking the good and leaving the bad.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

4e has absorbed many ideas from MMOs but it hasn't directly translated or ripped them. Instead the designers found their own way to introduce the same sort of tactical elements through their own mechanics.

That said the AIs in MMOs are some of the stupidest out there. Not surprising considering the server load and how many elements are being processed when you add up all the monsters and characters wandering around. Still it's pretty bad when you can predict the exact dimensions of aggro zones and kiting distance well enough to run through a field of mobs without drawing one.

 

[Zelster]

Maybe because most of us don't play Magic?

Lies! We all know that you lost your mana-cherry back in 6th grade, when Richard Garfield unleashed his destructive tide of nerdcore upon the USA!