D&D as a (good) MMORPG

[I'm A Banana]

I love D&D but it's a lousy system for an MMORPG. We can talk about the lack of roleplay or emphasis on loot or boring missions or whatever. Personally, I play WoW using Ventrilo for voice chat and it's great to be able to log in and be able to find a few guild memebers (who I don't know outside the game) and go on a quest for an hour or two. But D&D as an online game? No way. And I tried it with Neverwinter Nights with my buddies. D&D is just not that great for computers and if you want to start a new thread about it, I'd be happy to bore everyone to tears on the subject.

So here's the new thread. I'm not so sure I buy D&D as a lousy system for an MMO, inherently. Specifically, not too long ago, I posted about how some decent programmers could probably make a high-quality Planescape MMO tomorrow, if they wanted to.

The problems with DDO were, IMO, not based on the system. They were based on the competition (what does it offer that WoW doesn't?), and on the visuals (Hmm...richly colored world at my fingertips, or a mouldy shanty-town with dark coridoors and sewers).

But I'm definately interested in everyone's take on the subject.

 

[Doug McCrae]

D&D's class balance isn't good enough compared to WoW.

 

[Destil]

It could be a great MMO, but if you wanted to be true to the system you need to "disconnect" fighting and everything else. The system is very dependent on the turn based nature of combat, and would not work well in real time. So when a party gets into combat they need to go to their own min-zone and enter into turn-based combat system.

There are other concerns that could be covered with good game design. But you either need to really fudge the rules and go realtime or break the consistency of the game and go turn based.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

So here's the new thread. I'm not so sure I buy D&D as a lousy system for an MMO, inherently. Specifically, not too long ago, I posted about how some decent programmers could probably make a high-quality Planescape MMO tomorrow, if they wanted to.

The problems with DDO were, IMO, not based on the system. They were based on the competition (what does it offer that WoW doesn't?), and on the visuals (Hmm...richly colored world at my fingertips, or a mouldy shanty-town with dark coridoors and sewers).

But I'm definately interested in everyone's take on the subject.

No, it's a lousy system for an MMORPG.

It offers insufficient granularity, so there's both a relatively narrow range of challenges possible (a level 20 monster and a level 1 monster are much closer in hit point and damage potential than a top and bottom level monster in any MMORPG) and relatively few (only 19!) milestones in a character's development to serve as carrots to keep people playing.

And let's not forget fire-and-forget spells and the relative scarcity of healing compared to other MMORPGs.

Yes, great content can alleviate that, but if you're going to do that, why not go ahead and use a better system at the same time and be even more successful?

If you had your own production house and your own distribution method and were a private company with enough of a piggybank to do this as a "I don't care if it does much more than break even" project, I'm sure there's an audience out there. I just don't think there's a big enough audience out there for it to be worth a publicly funded blockbuster-minded company to produce.

An accurate D&D MMORPG would be pretty similar to the position of MUDs and MUSHs today: It'd probably attract a small but devoted following, but that's it.

 

[DreadArchon]

An accurate D&D MMORPG would be pretty similar to the position of MUDs and MUSHs today: It'd probably attract a small but devoted following, but that's it.

We have that now. It's called Neverwinter Nights persistent worlds. Also, Neverwinter Nights (this is NWN 1, mind you) goes to level 40, not just 20. I consider NWN my intro to MMO's, even though it technically isn't one.

Now, whether the D&D system is good for MMO's is a bit more subjective. I, for one, get bored to tears with anthing that lacks 3D tactical combat, and NWN doesn't have Fly spells. Then again, WoW falls far short of my standards on this, and it does just fine as an MMO; so I can't really comment on whether D&D mechanics make for an acceptable MMO experience without seeing a version that allows Fly speeds, Climb speeds, Swim speeds, and possibly even Burrow speeds.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

We have that now. It's called Neverwinter Nights persistent worlds. Also, Neverwinter Nights (this is NWN 1, mind you) goes to level 40, not just 20. I consider NWN my intro to MMO's, even though it technically isn't one.

Good point. And it's the most accurate-to-D&D multi-player game to date.

Now, whether the D&D system is good for MMO's is a bit more subjective. I, for one, get bored to tears with anthing that lacks 3D tactical combat, and NWN doesn't have Fly spells. Then again, WoW falls far short of my standards on this, and it does just fine as an MMO; so I can't really comment on whether D&D mechanics make for an acceptable MMO experience without seeing a version that allows Fly speeds, Climb speeds, Swim speeds, and possibly even Burrow speeds.

Hmmm. EQ1/EQ2/WoW all have land and sea based combat, and WoW explicitly breaks out swimming speed as a different base speed that can be modified by several different factors. I don't know of any MMORPGs other than City of Heroes (which didn't have swimming combat last time I played) and the late World War II Online that had aerial combat. (WoW has aerial combat in the sense that stuff can attack you in the air, but you can't fight back on a mount, making it a rather one-sided affair.)

I imagine it'll come, over time. But I agree, that will be required to add to the full D&D experience. Maybe NWN4 will have it.

 

[I'm A Banana]

D&D's class balance isn't good enough compared to WoW.

Good enough for what?

It's really just a different kind of balance. WoW's focus seems to be on "jack of most trades, master of one" design, where all characters have certain useful abilities, and the classes just distinguish who is the BEST. D&D's balance is more party-based, which means that it does require a party. But hirelings and NPC's have been a part of D&D for a whlie, which means that in an MMO, even if you personally lacked an ability, hiring an NPC with capable AI to perform the task shouldn't be a big deal.

But, again, I'm interested in what you mean by "good enough."

It offers insufficient granularity, so there's both a relatively narrow range of challenges possible (a level 20 monster and a level 1 monster are much closer in hit point and damage potential than a top and bottom level monster in any MMORPG) and relatively few (only 19!) milestones in a character's development to serve as carrots to keep people playing.

What about the milestones of magic items, which serve as 13.3-ish points on the road between levels? And what about "breadth and depth," which includes what many DM's have been doing for years: offering PC's more to do with the levels they have (breadth) other than just gaining levels (depth)? Specifically, in the Planescape MMO idea I posted about, we've got things like planar politics, faction development, and transforming PvP play. In standard D&D/Greyhawk, you still have old classics like building a castle, raising an army, leading the revolt, etc.

In other words, kind of imagine that the "persistant present" of WoW is eclipsed by a gradual advancement of the entire world, based on player actions (players can build castles, found/participate in organizations and governements, etc., in addition to simple level grinding). When a new "patch" came through, organizations and allegiances would shift.

And let's not forget fire-and-forget spells and the relative scarcity of healing compared to other MMORPGs.

But, again, is this a reason why the system would be bad, or just a new way of doing things? "8 hours of rest" can be glossed over pretty simply, as DDO has shown, and scarce healing magic seems more of a setting consideration than an absolute problem to me. Though I could be missing something.

These sound like problems, but I don't yet quite understand why they are problems, per se, and not just "something different."

 

[Mallus]

I play pen-and-paper RPG's to do all the stuff I can't do in a piece of computer software. So as far as I'm concerned, the D&D experience de facto can't adequately be simulated in an MMORPG environment.

Not until the day the game is run on a bunch of Turing Boxes.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Good enough for what?

It's really just a different kind of balance. WoW's focus seems to be on "jack of most trades, master of one" design, where all characters have certain useful abilities, and the classes just distinguish who is the BEST. D&D's balance is more party-based, which means that it does require a party. But hirelings and NPC's have been a part of D&D for a whlie, which means that in an MMO, even if you personally lacked an ability, hiring an NPC with capable AI to perform the task shouldn't be a big deal.

But, again, I'm interested in what you mean by "good enough."

Party-based balance doesn't work for the general audience in the U.S. Period. Only high end guilds embrace it, and though they are the audience most games preferentially cater to, they are not responsible for the bulk of the revenue. You have to at least allow basic gameplay viability to those who don't want to build "proper" parties.

American MMO players don't want to rely on a party for PVP purposes. They want to be able to go it alone. Heck, there's a VERY large segment of solo PVE players in the States, which is nonsensical to my way of thinking, but is part of the audience to consider.

Essentially, level 20 casters would be wiping the floor with everyone. PVP would devolve to mage-duels, because everyone else would be dead before they had a chance to feel effective. Plus, a high level mage can situationally be a better rogue than a Rogue and a better warrior than a Fighter, with the right spells. If you don't have any chance of affecting the outcome of a battle in a meaningful way, you'll take your business elsewhere.

PVE would also have problems. I play WoW, and there's more flexibility in party structure than in D&D, IMO. Sometimes, you just can't get the "right" classes. That's not crippling in WoW or EQ, because there's more flexibility built in.

What about the milestones of magic items, which serve as 13.3-ish points on the road between levels? And what about "breadth and depth," which includes what many DM's have been doing for years: offering PC's more to do with the levels they have (breadth) other than just gaining levels (depth)? Specifically, in the Planescape MMO idea I posted about, we've got things like planar politics, faction development, and transforming PvP play. In standard D&D/Greyhawk, you still have old classics like building a castle, raising an army, leading the revolt, etc.

In other words, kind of imagine that the "persistant present" of WoW is eclipsed by a gradual advancement of the entire world, based on player actions (players can build castles, found/participate in organizations and governements, etc., in addition to simple level grinding). When a new "patch" came through, organizations and allegiances would shift.

That might be a viable model in Korea. American gamers need simple carrots. They pitched fits until Blizzard gave them the option to skip all the quest text. There's a substantial majority who don't want to read lore. So politics and allegiances and so on reduce to "what phat lewts do I get from them?"

If someone did something like that right, it might catch on, but attempts at even 1/10 of that tend to get ignored in favor of simple reinforcement models: i.e. "I press the bar enough times, and I get [EPIX]"

But, again, is this a reason why the system would be bad, or just a new way of doing things? "8 hours of rest" can be glossed over pretty simply, as DDO has shown, and scarce healing magic seems more of a setting consideration than an absolute problem to me. Though I could be missing something.

These sound like problems, but I don't yet quite understand why they are problems, per se, and not just "something different."

"Different" has not been given a fair try, perhaps. But MMOs are not a place for experimentation. They're too costly. The attitudes and stated preferences of the average players argue against even trying your ideas.

 

[ShadowX]

The better question is, can you make a successful MMORPG with D&D. I would say no. As long as everyone is content with the Everquest model, a real D&D MMORPG will go under. Just look at this thread, people are trying to coerce D&D into a dynamic similar to WoW. Any developer is going to have to innovate the genre if he really wants to capture D&D and simultaneously make concessions in translating the ruleset to a MMO game. Unfortunately, I am quite convinced that the market doesn't want this type of game, they would rather continue bashing the brains out of the same monster ad infinitum than try any real roleplaying. Furthermore, I have little faith in any of today's development houses to scorn WoW and forge out into new directions.

Finally, as much as I love D&D, it has too many quirks and hurdles that it might be better to just create a new system with obvious homage to D&D. It's not like every RPG in existence today doesn't already.