But what if I LIKE Anime/Video-game tropes in my D&D?

[Jedi_Solo]

I was born in 1978 so I grew up on He-Man, GI Joe, Thundercats and Votron. My first exposure to D&D was the computer game Pool of Radiance on my dad's Commodore 64.

I like many anime series (Ghost in the Shell) and can't stand others (Dragonball Z). I really enjoy video games (I love FF6 (originally released in the US as FF3) and I don't really like FF7).

I don't mind adding influances from anime or videogame if it help the system (or at least if I think it helps the system). Is it going to speed up combat at higher levels? Let's have it. High level feels too much like DBZ for me at this time with the minute long combats taking three hours to resolve. I want combat to be faster paced so it feels more like Indiana Jones or the Lord of the Rings movies. If that means it is 'more anime' then I gladly welcome our anime overlords with open arms.

D&D has always been connected to video games for me (Pool of Radiance). I was first introduced to a similar skill system via Buck Rogers: Countdown to Doomsday (1990). I don't remember The Magic Candle (1989) well enough to know if that skill system was close enough to the current D&D skill system to count or not.

I can see where some of the arguments that 4e is 'more anime' or 'more videogamey' are coming from but I don't quite buy it. I doubt Diablo 2 was the first Skill Tree system and it definately wasn't originally from WoW. To me the ability to use spells more often seems LESS video gamey than the Vanician system (blame Pool of Radiance if you want).

I don't see that many anime or video game influances coming into the game... not yet anyway. That said, I don't care where it comes from if in my opinion it helps the game. The designers see an old action/adventure movie and get inspired? Great. The catch a rerun of He-Man or Thundercats and get an idea? Awesome. They play a new video game and have a thought of how to streamline a mechanic? Wonderful. They're forced to watch Teletubbies and the state of insanity they fall into gives them inspiration? Perfect.

I am incredably selfish; if it helps makes the game better for me I'm all for it.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

If it makes for better gameplay, then I'm all for it.

And from what's been revealed so far, it looks like I'll be one of those that will really enjoy the various changes in 4e. Then again, ToB: Bo9S is far and away my favorite D&D book by a huge margin, and frankly, I found D&D 1e and 2e to be boring as all get-out for the most part. 3e was a huge step in the right direction, and 4e does sound to be right up my alley so far.

That said, I don't want a fantasy RPG that draws too heavily on "anime" or "videogame" aspects. If I want the former, I'll go play BESM, and for the later I'll just go play a videogame.

 

[ObsidianCrane]

I'm a 80's child and a fan of Anime, Tolkien, and ... well these days more Gibson and Sterling than Fantasy.

Probably the best response I've seen to a fighter character in years was when I pulled out a Crusader (Bo9S) last Saturday and they did "cool stuff" every battle. That gives me buckets of hope for 4E being exactly what my playgroup is looking for from DnD.

I suspect 4E will be exactly what you make of it - it will be a faster paced game with more options for the players and DMs alike. It will be both more Anime, and more LotR.

The types of stories we tell with it will be the deciding factor of how it feels to us when we are playing it - Anime or LotR.

 

[Rallek]

Gods know that I love video games, I’ve even played a number of MMOs. I think that there is a whole lot of bad anime out there, but there is also a fair bit of good anime which I happen to enjoy quite a bit. (read “good anime” as “anime that I like” and “bad anime” as “anime that I don’t like”) As far as any “anime flavor” in 4e, I think there are a few hints of it. A few of the names seem more harmonious with anime style than with previous D&D, and a few of the abilities of various races/classes seem to suggest a more “anime-ish” setting to me. Is this my particular cup of table top gaming tea? No. If I use 4e will I remove and/or limit these things? Yes. Will I re-work a very large chunk of fluff to suit my games? Certainly. Do I think that this will be bad for the hobby? Honestly, no.



I prefer a more low powered, grittier game at my table. E6 hits my group right where we live, and I’ve been restricting/cutting certain spells/powers/races/classes/kits since my first day with the magic DM hat. Every group that runs in a homebrewed setting that I’ve ever met does exactly the same thing. They take what they want, and they leave the rest. Then they re-tool what they took to get the flavor that they like. Then they houserule any gaps that they’ve picked up along the way. Does it look like that job will be bigger (for me) with 4e than with 3e? Sure does. By the same token I’m sure that syncing the new rules and fluff with their personal playstyle preference will be a much smaller job with 4e for some groups. I already pull out a lot of the “high fantasy” fluff, pulling out any potential “anime fluff” is the same job on a different day, at least in my opinion.



What is of much more concern to me, with regards to the future of the hobby, is the apparent (in my opinion) shift towards more of a “video game” feel in 4e. Now as I’ve already stated I do love video games, but I think making D&D look more like one is a mistake. Why? Because if D&D tries to compete with videogames on their own ground, D&D will lose. Period.



What do I mean by that? Well, If I want grid based tactical combat, with a bunch of crunchy options, and I want the turns to flow smoothly with no math required, and no rules look-ups, I’m reaching for a videogame. Why? Because videogames do it better. If I want to have a bunch of combat abilities that I can use every so often, the computer can track them all in real time while I continue the fight unencumbered by a need to do so, again the videogame is king of this particular hill. Wading through an army of low level enemies in a “cool” and “badass” fashion… and in a timely manner? Nod goes to the videogame again. I don’t even need to count squares for my fireball, all that behind the scenes math is done by the machine, I just press A, B, X, Y, square, circle, triangle, or left click and let it rip. These are the strengths of a video game against D&D, and D&D shouldn’t get involved in a contest over these areas. It should stick to what it does better than any videogame can, otherwise people may look up from the table and ask, "Why am I not playing The Witcher right now?"



What keeps my group coming back to the table, and gets new members to sit down at the table for the first time, is two fold. One aspect, of course, is the social factor. MMOs are social by their nature, but teamspeak or no, they just don’t compare to the face-to-face socialization found at the table. The other strength of table top D&D relies on the internal consistency of the game, and the flexibility and potential inherent in having a human as manager. You can have the sense of participating in a living and breathing world, where you can attempt anything that you want, and see the results unfold on multiple levels. NPCs cane be as deep and engaging as you want them to be. Whole story arcs can arise from nothing more than the fact that you want to help child beggar #3, or “Timmy” as he’s known after you decide to help. You can decide to raise sheep, or establish a town in the frontier. You could hand your town off to others, and decide to grab a ship and start looking for trade Marco Polo style, it’s whatever your group wants it to be. No video game can match this. Honestly no video game can even come close. These are the areas where D&D should make its stand. This is the arena in which it should challenge the video game, because here it wins, and does so with certainty.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

I work part-time at a local Borders and the manga section is the only section that has experienced growth in recent years. I suspect it's a similar situation for most bookstores.

Exalted sells about as well as Vampire does, which in the RPG industry is pretty good. Sure, it's not as big a seller as D&D, but then again nothing is.

 

[Midknightsun]

I don't mind if there is a bit more anime/video game influence in 4e at all. That being said, its really been hard to tell who's copying whom anymore.

Seriously, D&D and videogames are like two hillbilly families that have been trading daughters for a couple generations.

On another note, My teen years were more of the late 80/early 90s, but i played 1st edition through 3.5. I was inspired by Michael Moorcock, Robert Jordon and David Eddings to name a few. I also like anime (some, not all). Tolken, while I appreciate what came from him into D&D, I found to be too verbose. (admittedly, Jordan wasn't far behind in overly descriptive text). Funny enough, many of Moorcock's stories would need more of an anime approach to pull off appropriately, as many of them were definitely "over the top" fantasy, long before anime really even came on the scene, and I loved most of his stuff. So if it gets a little more anime and video gamey, I'm not worried. Granted, I don't think 1st level characters should be able to pull off physics-bending maneuvers out of the gate, but later . . . . why not?

I'll admit I do enjoy the good old Conan approach to fantasy, but I don't think even 1st edition pulled that off very well. 3.5 needed a separate book or two to come close, as the core rules are far to magic reliant (as were all the editions to a greater or lesser degree).

 

[Wormwood]

Seriously, D&D and videogames are like two hillbilly families that have been trading daughters for a couple generations.

/thread

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I am by no means a 4E booster, but the "anime / manga / video game" feel of 4E isnt one of the reasons why.

Someone further upthread did a nice job of backhanding those of us who actually like anime by implying that only children enjoy anime and mature adults look for something better. I can 't properly respond to that because I'd get booted from ENworld. But I will say as someone who has been watching anime for over 20 years that that declaration is pretty obnoxious not to mention wrong.

It's the same kind of snobbery that makes people who dont understand our hobby look down on most of us and sneer "geeks". It's a pattern of thought that can be applied to those of us that still read superhero comics (like I do). Not just the trendy, "mature" stuff like Watchmen, Dark Knight Returns, Miracleman and Sandman. I'm talking Byrne / Claremont X-men, Giffen / Levitz LOSH, Gruenwald Captain America, Wolfman / Perez Teen Titans. Because if you label shonen as childish, power fantasies then American SuperHero books are right up there. And for that matter so is D&D. I mean sitting around a table rolling strange dice pretending that youre a skilled / brawny / wily swordsman / barbarian / thief ? Gritty or High powered fantasy, it doesn't matter that's pretty strange to a lot of people.

Look, I started out on the "geek path" by reading super-hero comics. Then got introduced to D&D, then started reading Tolkien. Then got into Anime (mostly shonen and Mecha shows like Aura Battler Dunbine, Heavy Metal L-Gaim, Macross, Giant Gorg and Kido Senshi Zeta Gundam). But I still love fantasy. The problem here is that for some of you, your fantasy needs to pigeonholed into a specific "feel". That's cool to have a preference, but to imply that anything that isnt your preference isnt really D&D is just kinda dumb. I see where there's room for gritty low magic fantasy (which I've enjoyed from time to time but really isnt my preferred default) to crazy Super Saiya-Jin level, mountain destroying power fests (Which I have also enjoyed, but really isnt my preferred default either) to something in the middle (which honestly, despite my dislike of the idea of 4E, I see it as a middle ground between the two extremes)

those of you who are saying that Anime and Manga arent a big influence need to look again. I remember a time in american animation where continuing storylines were almost non existent (and I'm sorry, the five part Gi-Joe where they tried to stop cobra from getting the weather dominator doesn't really count). Where major changes to characters never really happened and character death and dealing with character deaths in an animated show almost NEVER happened. Where animated characters were treated as if that's all they were CARTOON CHARACTERS.

I think alot of the animators who are out there now telling stories were fans of anime and saw how the storytelling could be pushed forward in the types of stories they told. Avatar the Last Airbender being the most obvious one, but even Justice League Unlimited with the season long Cadmus Arc would never have been done with such maturity and seriousness 20 years ago, Teen Titans would have never had a the episode where Robin is hallucinating and getting the crap beat out of him by Slade (an episode that examined Robin's obsession with Slade). Anime despite some of the silliness of some of the shows, really treats some of the themes with a seriousness that American animation prior to anime coming here, would never have done.

And lets not even talk about how popular manga is. I live and work in NYC and the closest comic book store to me is a place called Jim Hanleys Universe. When they first decided to have manga in thier store it was mixed in with the rest of the comics. Then they decided to give it a dedicated section, over the past 3 or 4 years that section has continued to grow and grow and grow. The same thing with Manga in major chains, dedicated manga sections and there are always teenage girls and boys in those sections reading the manga. Especially, TEENAGE GIRLS. I only bring this up because ALOT of the anime that get greenlit are based off of popular Manga. Exposure to both of these forms of media is going to have a big influence on teens and pre-teens. This point I'm fairly certain that in 5-10 years the average teen is going to be more familiar with manga and anime than they will with the old fantasy standby's like Tolkien and Moorcock. And teenage girls are a market that D&D has yet to reach in substantial numbers. If 4E feels like it can replicate the stuff that they see/read in shows like SLAYERS! and Magic Knight Raerth then that's what will draw them.

The older crowd will play whatever edition that makes them comfortable.

But it's not about us anymore. If you dont mind the influence or can find away to work around it great. But it's coming whether you want it to or not.

 

[Scribble]

I'm always confused by the logic that just because D&D outsells other games or game systems that that means it shouldn't be influenced at all by those other games...

The fact is SOMEONE is buying those other games. That's a potential someone that could have instead purchased a D&D book.

Overlooking those players is basically assuming that you will always be the best no matter what. A dangerous assumption in the world of business.

Why not grow the hobby? Why not give those players that would have instead turned to WoW a reason to play D&D? Why not give those players that instead play Exalted a reason not to play Exalted and instead play D&D?

How will more players harm the hobby?

 

[kennew142]

It's more the mechanics, I think.

Wizards are just evokers = just like WoW.

Fighters got powarz. That's Anime, AND video-gamey.

Per encounters = refresh abilities and button mashing.

Monsters have a narrower focus with their abilities = just faceles monsters with one trick for killing.

This is possibly the worst case of spin I've seen, even on this forum. Not a single statement above is remotely objective.

No one, aside from a few 4e haters, has said that wizards will be just evokers. It has been stated that the most powerful echantment and illusion effects are being reserved for other classes. Utility spells (e.g. phantome steed) have already been mentioned as still being in the game, as have non-evocation spells such as sleep.

Fighters have powers, most of which would be better described as maneuvers. Anyone who has even skimmed the Book of Nine Swords (touted as a significant preview of 4e) can see that the majority of the powers listed in that book are not supernatural in origin.

Per encounter abilities in no way equal button smashing. It is an alternate method of resource management that doesn't require a party to rest after a 15 minute work day. It also happens to simulate cinematic action (yes, even non-anime cinematic action) and traditional fantasy (i.e. fantasy not written from a D&D perspective) better than the current system.

Anyone who thinks that monsters in D&D are one trick ponies hasn't been looking at the previews we've been given. Dragons in particular have been shown to have a wide range of abilities and attacks. If giving foes a tighter focus means no more giants with a strange mish-mash of abilities that don't work together, and are either too powerful or so weak as to be meaningless for a CR appropriate encounter, then I am all for it. It's what's called good game design.

The only reason that the designers of 4e didn't implement some of the upcoming changes is that they were afraid of slaughtering too many sacred cows.