Mustrum_Ridcully said:
The question you should ask yourself (if you'd like to present answers, I suggest a more suitable thread):
Why is it bad if ideas or concepts that can be found in video games are transferred to games? Is it uniformly bad, just because everything in a video game must be inherently inferior? Or is it just bad because some mechanics work only in video games due to specifics of how such a game is played compared to how a pen & paper game is played?
Is it impossible for a video game mechanic to work in a pen & paper context? Why was the reverse possible? What is the critical distinction between a video game and a pen & paper game, and which of these are informed purely by mechanics? What are the strength and the weaknesses of each type of game, and which type of mechanics play on these strength or weaknesses, and is it impossible for a mechanic to be independent of it?
Video game rules do not encourage roleplaying. Big example of this was the concern over aggro. The idea that the designers were contemplating an aggro system is worrisome to me. I will not have my players telling me how I should run intelligent monsters because a game designer decided to include aggro rules like those in World of Warcraft.
I would prefer that the design inspiration for a pen and paper RPG was derived from books rather than video games. Video games focus on mechanics, whereas books focus on story. A creative game designer reads a book and figures out how to render an action described only by words into a useable form for an pen and paper RPG.
Nebulous abilities that do things like give bonuses to other party members to hit had better have a literary reason. If the only thinking behind using an ability is its mechanical advantage rather than how it applies from a story standpoint, then that thinking is too much akin to a video game.
If I cannot explain the ability with prose and visualize it as though it were involved in a story, I generally do not want it in my RPG. Then again, I'm one of those people that added in exceptions to the
Cleave feat that required the player to follow a particular arc. A player using
Cleave can not use a cleave attack on any opponent that satisfies the condition no matter where they are standing. I required that opponent to be in a position where a cleaving type attack was reasonable because I understood the intention of the mechanic from a story perspective.
As long as the abilities designed have a strong story element first and a mechanic second, I won't mind too much. But one thing that will definitely turn me from fourth edition will be any kind of aggro mechanic. I don't want that at all. Who an enemy attacks will be determined by the individual enemy's level of intelligence, their awareness of the capabilities of the players, and the best strategy available to them. None of this crud aggro system taken straight out of WoW.
So as far as your questions go, it'll be wait and see. I do have criteria The main one being that I must be able to imagine the ability occurring. I must be able to visualize the ability working. Nebulous abilities that grant an advantage for no good reason other than to give a useful advatage to a player will affect my decision to pick up the game.
