D&D 4E 4e like WoW? Nope, Wrong Game

Falling Icicle

Adventurer
Alot of people have been saying that 4th edition is like WoW. However, I think it's actually alot more similar to another Blizzard game, Diablo 2. Now, before all you fanboys get yourselves in a twist, let me just say that this is not intended to be a flame 4e thread. I just find these things to be amusing, that's all. ;) All of them, except for the armor tiers, are things I like. Here's some of the similarities that stuck out to me:

:1: Diablo 2 classes all use the same system for "skills" (character powers), whether it's Barbarian combat moves or Sorceress spells. They all use the same system, but each class's selection of skills is unique. The same goes for powers in 4e, which is the same for all classes, but every class has a unique list of powers.

:2: In Diablo 2, new and more powerful skills become available at specific levels: 6, 12, 18, etc. All classes share this progression. In 4e, new and more powerful powers become avaiable at specific levels. All classes share this progression.

:3: In Diablo 2, classes are divided into subclasses. Amazons can be "bowazons" (archers) or "javazons" (spear-throwers), for example. Each path has its own skills. While you will tend to specialize in one or the other, you are still free to pick up skills from the other paths. In 4e, classes are divided into subclasses, such as archer rangers and dual-wielding rangers. Each path has its own powers. While you will tend to specialize in one or the other, you are still free to pick up powers from the other path.

:4: Diablo 2 is set in three tiers of difficulty: normal, nightmare and hell. 4e has three tiers of difficulty: heroic, paragon and epic.

:5: Diablo 2 has three tiers of gear. Each type of armor is replaced by a new, more powerful type of the same armor at higher levels. Leather Armor, for example, is replaced by serpentskin armor and later by wyrm hide. Likewise, in 4e, armor has three tiers. Leather armor is replaced by Feyleather and then by Starleather, for example.

:6: Diablo 2 casters and non-casters all use the same system of resource management (mana). 4e classes all use the same form of resource management (at-will, ecounter, and daily).

:ranged: Diablo 2 casters and non-caster classes are pretty well balanced with each other, having about the same potential to do damage. Likewise, in 4e, unlike previous editions of D&D, melee classes can equal or exceed the damage output of wizards.

:melee: In Diablo 2, wands, staves and orbs are spellcaster weapons and give bonuses to your spells. In 4e D&D, unlike every previous edition where wands and staves are spell batteries, wands, staves and orbs are "implements," which function like weapons and give bonuses to your spells.

:bmelee: Diablo 2 spellcasters can cast spells in armor, without any kind of "arcane spell failure." 4e spellcasters, in a dramatic departure from previous editions, can cast spells in armor without any kind of arcane spell failure.

:area: In Diablo 2, Sorceresses have a skill called cold mastery, which gives targets vulnerability to cold damage, causing them to take increased damage from cold spells. In 4e, the Lasting Frost feat gives targets vulnerability to your cold spells, causing them to take increased damage from cold spells.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad





Falling Icicle said:
:4: Diablo 2 is set in three tiers of difficulty: normal, nightmare and hell. 4e has three tiers of difficulty: heroic, paragon and epic.
In what way is the epic tier more "difficult" than the paragon tier?

edit - Never mind, I'd rather not hear the argument. :) Just saying, I think this one is definitely a stretch.
 


FrantzX said:
Wasn't this the main anti-3E argument made during the 2E-3E transition 8 years ago?

Yes it was.

Of course, one of the earliest D20 product on the market was a 3e Adaptation of Diablo 2, so there might have been something there... ;)
 


You could also make the argument that it's like chess: different pieces representing classes, each class having a special maneuver that only similar classes to it can accomplish, playing on a surface divided into squares, regicide being a common campaign theme, etc. ;)

But more seriously, I can see some of these points, but a lot do appear to be stretches to me:
--likening the three difficulty modes to the three tiers isn't congruent, as one deals with campaign setting, and the other deals with level progression. Heck, Diablo 2 has more difficulty with level progression, and that's a staple of all fantasy games pretty much.
--Mana is nothing like the at-will/encounter/daily split; one might as well say that they're alike because all classes in D2 use health, and all classes in D&D use hit points.
--The specifics of cold vulnerabilities, etc. aren't that significant to me, because there are only so many types of energy attacks and so many types of ways that bonuses and penalties can be designed for a given game. You're bound to have overlap, just like the whole "hit points" thing.

So there may be some, but I'm not seeing a huge resemblance.
 

Remove ads

Top