Running D&D in a boardgame style

[frankthedm]

"Insert trollish Anti 4E comment based on thread title here."

 

[WayneLigon]

Wilderness: Maybe a hex map. Walk around the hex map, discover encounters on the hexes.

Dungeons: Certain hexes contain dungeons. PCs go to another map if they choose to enter.

About like that, yeah. Randomized dungeons and extensive encounter charts should take care of the rest. I've played many a game of OD&D and 1E that were little more than 'more complex than normal' boardgames.

 

[Khairn]

Of course any RPG can provide that but IMO 4e does a good job of providing an "adventure game" toolkit that can be tailored to the needs of an individual group (despite some of it's flaws).

Many RPG's attempt to balance characters with the use of skills, utility abilities and fluff. 4E's driving focus on every class having to balanced in combat first and foremost makes it the perfect set of rules for a boardgame such as the one rounser is describing.

Using tiles to build the adventuring "path" and a pre-determined set of encounters that followed a theme / design would mean that no GM would be required.

That's a really interesting boardgame and something I would most likely be willing to play.

 

[rounser]

Using tiles to build the adventuring "path" and a pre-determined set of encounters that followed a theme / design would mean that no GM would be required.

I think you'd need to redesign the game entirely to remove the GM. D&D doesn't run without someone running the monsters. It's definitely more Descent than Talisman. Plenty of boardgames have a "GM role", for that matter, such as Space Hulk and Heroquest, so I'm not sure what's to be gained by removing the DM from D&D, really.

Admittedly, though, all three examples I cited there feature an adversarial GM, as opposed to D&D's [somewhat] benevolent DM. I'd argue that the 'semi-benevolent GM' is an advantage that D&D has over board games, and not something to be downplayed.

 

[Thanee]

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

 

[rounser]

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.

Okay...but again, why would you want to?

Nethack offers less immersion than D&D because it's so random and there's no brains behind it. A DM aided by random tables, perhaps with power of veto and extrapolation is most of the time likely to be far superior to just random tables, because...well...all sorts of reasons that I don't need to sell you on, surely?

I'm not familiar with Warhammer Quest, though. I can still see how it could be hugely fun to game without a DM given the right ruleset, but I don't really get why you'd go to the trouble of removing such an obvious advantage from the game.

Unless....unless you were game designer worried about deviations in quality of play based on who was running it, in which case removing the DM would be an excellent idea. DM fiat not just controlled, it's now a non-issue. Goodbye narcissistic control freaks and frustrated wannabe fantasy novelists, ciao! The downside is that I don't see how you could maintain the game's depth without one. It would require a billion tables, and might still have no thread.

A DM aided by a billion tables (or equivalent to that but less cumbersome - an elegant "d20 system of generation") to flesh out his maps, on the other hand, that's a different story, and tops my wishlist for 5E. Not sure if it's feasible, though. How do you roll up a magic fountain which turns people's hair green? How do you table-format a riddle or a puzzle? How do you codify on three tables the ability to roll up a greengrocer who sells dragon eggs?

On the other hand, it would give the DMG something to do, and an excuse to be really thick and arcane, and infinitely expandable ($$$).

 

[Angellis_ater]

I am going to be doing a Descent & Dragons 4E game in the future. All combats will be using the Descent miniatures, the Descent tiles and they get to pick a "hero miniature". Outside of Dungeons and Encounters (ie outdoors map tiles from Road to Legend) we will revert to normal roleplaying. To me (and this is not 4E-bashing), D&D4E is a boardgame with extensive roleplaying rules...

However, I will also be taking a much more "adversarial role" while they DO dungeon delve. Some dungeons will contain monsters or challenges that they cannot immediately overcome. Some are places they will have to come back to, with forewarned monsters.

 

[Thanee]

Okay...but again, why would you want to?

Because it's fun?

Because sometimes noone really wants to DM and it's a nice change of pace.

I'm not familiar with Warhammer Quest, though. I can still see how it could be hugely fun to game without a DM given the right ruleset, but I don't really get why you'd go to the trouble of removing such an obvious advantage from the game.

I'm not. Circumstances do.

When a DM is available, the game with DM is surely superior. No argument.

But what when no DM is available? Go home and watch TV? Or play a fun boardgame with D&D-like rules. I know what I would prefer to do.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Charwoman Gene]

To me (and this is not 4E-bashing), D&D4E is a boardgame with extensive roleplaying rules...

Just like 3e

 

[Khairn]

Just like 3e

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.