Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PeterWeller" data-source="post: 3837717" data-attributes="member: 55795">I seem to remember CoH Tanks being able to solo instances scaled for six or seven people without breaking a sweat.  Maybe they killed stuff a little slower than Scrappers or Blasters, but they in turn were almost invincible and could wade into fights alone that would have caused entire Tank-less parties to blanch.  The walking tower shields you're talking about were, oddly enough, the Bubble Defenders, who would be considered "Leaders" in the D&D class roles.I can see why you're bothered, but look at it from the other side:  MMOs have taught D&D that "I attack" is totally lame compared to "I cast fireball (or sleep or wish or whatever)."  I have no problem with greater tactical depth influenced by MMOs and other CRPGs because of two reasons: One, it's a full circle kind of thing.  MMOs owe their very existence to attempting to emulate D&D (like you mentioned).  I agree that they can never emulate what really makes D&D and other PnP RPGs great, but they can greatly influence and improve those parts of D&D that they do emulate, namely combat.  The second reason flows from that.  I really only see this MMO or WoW or whatever influence (when is someone gonna start claiming they're ripping stuff from Oblivion?) being felt in the combat rules.  The same things that make it nigh impossible for MMOs or even really solid "RP-ey" CRPGs like Fallout to truly emulate what makes D&D great (the freedom of decision, action and interaction with the environment) are going to prevent those parts of D&D from getting "MMO-ed."Now, I once held the fear that the more specific special actions the game included, the more it would implicitly become a "you can't" game than a "you can" one, but that's only a problem when the maneuvers dictate a very, very specific action.  In the case of this particular Rogue ability, I don't see that being a problem.  The Rogue gets a maneuver that lets him or her move three squares as part of his or her action, but as long as it's still up to the player as to how, specifically, that move happens, whether it be a dive, a dash, or a leap, then I don't see it being restrictive and instead giving players a concrete way in which to take the action they are imagining.  Look at, for example and because I'm wildly drawing comparisons between D&D and a whole bunch of other games right now, Heroclix.  In the new JLA set, Merlyn gets "psychic blast" as an attack on his dial.  However, the character Merlyn isn't a psychic; he's an archer, and the psychic blast power represents his ability to fire with pin point and deadly accuracy.  If these maneuvers and actions work like that, where they provide technical effects, but the fluff itself is left up to the player's imagination, I see no problem with having more detailed and varied combat abilities for Fighters, Rogues, etc.Now, there are other assumptions that it appears D&D is adopting from the MMO world: class balance and class roles for instance, but these, I think, were always implicit in D&D, and the desire and need to constantly address balance in MMOs has only brought them to the fore.  Pet Tanking in MMOs is something I'm sure has had a strong effect on how PnP developers approach pet classes.  And while it might bother a lot of people to see WoTC apparently catering to the MMO crowd, I've experienced numerous instances of D&D drawing in players from MMOs who wanted something more.  If the game adopts some of the ideas that make WoW great (and hate is as much as you want, but for a traditional EQ vein MMO, it is great), what's wrong with that?  After all, those very ideas found their roots in gamers trying to transmit the D&D experience from the table to the screen.God, sorry for the long post guys, and sorry that it's only slightly on topic.</blockquote>

Verification