Running D&D in a boardgame style

[JVisgaitis]

You have a lot of choices. Go to boardgamegeek.com and take at the exploration category. You'll find tons of games. Some of the most relevant would be:

Heroquest
Advanced Heroquest
Warhammer Quest
Descent
Dark World
etc.

I'd also take a look at Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures. That's basically a board game already and the stats are already done in an easier to use manner.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

In the application the op described I think its clear that 4E is vastly superior to 3E. The "in-combat" balance of the classes and how they scale as they advance in levels would make it a much better game. At least IMO.

Of course the fact that it doesn't tactically feel at all like any board game might be a problem.

 

[Shadeydm]

Just like 3e

Well that didn't take long at all...

 

[Imaro]

Just like 3e

Was this really necessary...I mean there has been no mention of 3e vs. 4e throughout this entire thread, until here. The poster sees D&D 4e in a certain way and makes no mention of 3e in asserting his opinion on what 4e is to him.

@OP: Here's an idea for semi-DM less D&D 4e. Each player creates the outline of a quest they are interested in undertaking and writes it down (along with it's xp value) on an index card. Then each player randomly draws one of these quests and designs the dungeon map and encounter deck for it, using the xp value as their point pool for creation of monsters, skill challenges, etc. At the gametable it is either agreed upon beforehand or randomly determined whose quest will be embarked upon first, second, third, etc. Now every player participates as follows...

Hostile or adversarial NPC's to your character (including monsters and traps) are run by the player to your left.

Beneficial and/or friendly characters (patrons, allies, etc.) to your character are run by the player on your right.

Neutral or ambivalent characters/monsters (shopkeepers, trainers,etc.) are run by the player directly across from you.

It's a little rough, since it's off the top of my head, but I think something like this could have potential for groups that want to spread out DM'ing responsibilities or creative control of the campaign as well as creating an environment where everyone gets a chance to play a character.

 

[jgerman]

You have a lot of choices. Go to boardgamegeek.com and take at the exploration category. You'll find tons of games. Some of the most relevant would be:

Heroquest
Advanced Heroquest
Warhammer Quest
Descent
Dark World
etc.

I'd also take a look at Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures. That's basically a board game already and the stats are already done in an easier to use manner.

Those are all valid choices but all save 1 are out of print IIRC. Descent is a good game, but the question is why would you choose that over the ability to have a deeper experience using 4e sans any roleplaying? And get a game that's much more expandable to boot?

I have Descent and all the expansions, but I doubt it'll make it to the table very often now. All it really offers at this point is the "GM as adversary" which can easily be done in 4e, it's just not the out of the box experience. In all other aspects: combat, character options, environments, etc.. 4e has it beat IMO.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

I actually think an RPG/boardgame hybrid based on 4E could be a lot of fun.

You could buy prepackaged campaigns, with software that ran the 'out of combat' part of the game, and maps in sealed packages that you opened as the players reached the right area. Sortof like the old solo adventure booklets that they had in the 70s.

The twist would be, one player would play the monsters. He would score points based on how well he did against the other players. So you would open up the sealed package with the encounter area, and the monster player would get his bad guys and set them up and the PCs would explore/attack the area.

The PCs would be functioning as a group, but would also have individual victory conditions, and would have a lot of ability to screw with each other (but not directly attack each other). Sortof like in Hackmaster, or paranoia. The idea being that the PCs had to work together to a certain degree to have a chance to beat the DM player, but at then end of the game only one PC would win (the one with the most treasure of course!).

I think it could be really fun, because it would allow a bit of adversarial gaming that is usually destructive to RPGs.

I also think that Tom Wham would be an excellent illustrator for a game like this!

Ken

 

[JVisgaitis]

Those are all valid choices but all save 1 are out of print IIRC. Descent is a good game, but the question is why would you choose that over the ability to have a deeper experience using 4e sans any roleplaying?

If I want a "deeper experience" I'll play D&D. If I want to play a D&D Boardgame, I'd probably just play Heroquest or Descent. It's the same reason why I don't play D&D Miniatures. I think its so close to D&D its kinda a waste of a game. Given the choice between the two, I'd play D&D everytime unless I want something light and simple.

 

[SteveC]

Warhammer Quest works great without a GM and it's certainly possible (with some additional work to replace the DM role with rules and random tables) to do this with D&D as well.

Bye
Thanee

I'll second this ... Warhammer Quest is all kinds of awesome, and the rules for random dungeons in the back of the DMG even mention this as a possibility. As to "why?" because it's a fantastic time!

Playing a session of Warhammer Quest is very different from D&D in some ways, but to do a dungeon crawl, it does a far better job. With the new edition, it would be reasonably easy to translate the game over.

Not that this would replace a good D&D session or anything, but it would be a fantastic alternative for those days when someone doesn't want to wear the Viking Hat.

--Steve

 

[hexgrid]

You might want to take a look at Dungeon Bash:

http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=19159&it=1

It's an attempt to do exactly with with the d20 ruleset. Swapping in 4e character creation and combat probably wouldn't take much work.

 

[jgerman]

If I want a "deeper experience" I'll play D&D. If I want to play a D&D Boardgame, I'd probably just play Heroquest or Descent. It's the same reason why I don't play D&D Miniatures. I think its so close to D&D its kinda a waste of a game. Given the choice between the two, I'd play D&D everytime unless I want something light and simple.

That's great, but not everyone is looking for a binary experience. Some people want more than a board game but less than a full rpg.

Since the OP was talking specifically about using 4e to make something somewhere in the middle your black and white options aren't really relevant.

Like I said, those are all decent games, only one is currently available, and it doesn't offer the experience the OP was asking for. I can't say I understand where you're coming from, the OP didn't ask for other games to play instead, he asked for thoughts on how to run D&D the way he described.

All of those games can certainly provide inspiration, but offering them as replacements is off topic as none of them provide that mid-level experience.