Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 1663541" data-attributes="member: 151">This concept predates MMORPGs by decades.&nbsp; Remember that D&amp;D came from Chainmail, which was a set of miniatures rules.&nbsp; It's one reason that the core classes from AD&amp;D were so tightly focused and immutable.&nbsp; A party travelling without a cleric could get by, but they could be greatly hamstrung without something to fill the gap and undead became a much more potent threat.&nbsp; The same concept applied to traps without a thief or fighting powerful creatures without a good fighter or wizard.&nbsp;&nbsp;MMORPGs aren't influencing the current batch of RPGs...they're just more transparent at showing the underpinnings.&nbsp; More importantly, an MMORPG is only as good as it weakest link.&nbsp; You don't notice the cool players who are out to have fun: you only notice the jerks.&nbsp; City of Heroes is the first game out there that took the emphasis away from the loot, and that's made a world of difference.&nbsp; However, any MMORPG is going to suffer from problems that a simple pen-and-paper game would never have to worry about.&nbsp; Technical limitations, a huge player-base and lots of tweaking and testing.&nbsp; Compare how long it takes a DM to create a new module, and contrast that with creating, testing and rolling out a new quest to an established game world with tens of thousands of players.&nbsp; The biggest problem with MMORPGs has traditionally been that one person pees in the pool, and no one can enjoy swimming.&nbsp; More recent MMORPGs are finding ways to fix that problem, such as instanced dungeons and the like.&nbsp;&nbsp;Not to sound glib, but I here this mantra periodically, and it's always &quot;XX has made the game go all XX&quot; or&nbsp; &quot;No one plays the game in XX fashion, anymore&quot;.&nbsp; Typical culprits, over time, have been:&nbsp;<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Collectible Card Games (usually Magic)&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Video Games&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Computer RPGs&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Console RPGs&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Collectible Miniature Games&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Third Edition&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Revised Third Edition&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Anime&nbsp;&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Pokemon </li>
</ul>And usually, the observation assumes that the game has changed, or that a majority of players have switched their habits, and I've yet to see that be the case.&nbsp; It isn't to say that people don't play that way, but I haven't seen some new trend.&nbsp; These are arguments as old as the game, usually.&nbsp; The only reason folks might see an increase of them is because there has been a fairly huge increase in players of the game in general, since the release of third edition.&nbsp;&nbsp;Mind you, if someone ridiculed you for having a non-standard party, they've got issues.&nbsp; A well designed adventure should work for any party, although it should concern itself with balancing against the 'core four'.&nbsp; But if you cannot complete an adventure without an arcane caster having one specific spell or only if you have a druid...then the problem lies with the module, IMHO.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 1663541, member: 151"] This concept predates MMORPGs by decades. Remember that D&D came from Chainmail, which was a set of miniatures rules. It's one reason that the core classes from AD&D were so tightly focused and immutable. A party travelling without a cleric could get by, but they could be greatly hamstrung without something to fill the gap and undead became a much more potent threat. The same concept applied to traps without a thief or fighting powerful creatures without a good fighter or wizard. MMORPGs aren't influencing the current batch of RPGs...they're just more transparent at showing the underpinnings. More importantly, an MMORPG is only as good as it weakest link. You don't notice the cool players who are out to have fun: you only notice the jerks. City of Heroes is the first game out there that took the emphasis away from the loot, and that's made a world of difference. However, any MMORPG is going to suffer from problems that a simple pen-and-paper game would never have to worry about. Technical limitations, a huge player-base and lots of tweaking and testing. Compare how long it takes a DM to create a new module, and contrast that with creating, testing and rolling out a new quest to an established game world with tens of thousands of players. The biggest problem with MMORPGs has traditionally been that one person pees in the pool, and no one can enjoy swimming. More recent MMORPGs are finding ways to fix that problem, such as instanced dungeons and the like. Not to sound glib, but I here this mantra periodically, and it's always "XX has made the game go all XX" or "No one plays the game in XX fashion, anymore". Typical culprits, over time, have been: [list] [*]Collectible Card Games (usually Magic) [*]Video Games [*]Computer RPGs [*]Console RPGs [*]Collectible Miniature Games [*]Third Edition [*]The Revised Third Edition [*]Anime [*]Pokemon [/list] And usually, the observation assumes that the game has changed, or that a majority of players have switched their habits, and I've yet to see that be the case. It isn't to say that people don't play that way, but I haven't seen some new trend. These are arguments as old as the game, usually. The only reason folks might see an increase of them is because there has been a fairly huge increase in players of the game in general, since the release of third edition. Mind you, if someone ridiculed you for having a non-standard party, they've got issues. A well designed adventure should work for any party, although it should concern itself with balancing against the 'core four'. But if you cannot complete an adventure without an arcane caster having one specific spell or only if you have a druid...then the problem lies with the module, IMHO. [/QUOTE]

Verification