Video game influences on my D&D

[Paraxis]

I honestly just now read the new class "knight" from PHB2. Sorry if this has been discussed before, but it just tweaked a nerve in me. For most of the history of rpg video games D&D has had a strong influence on them, I think this is just natural evolution of the game as technology progresses. But I am starting to see more and more of the opposite, a strong influence on d20 by the video games we play and the designers play. I don't want to sit at a table and play a mini version of my favorite online MMORG or other game. I also fear 4.0 will be called Instances & BBEG's and have agro as a mechanic and drop rates for certain monsters for specific magic items.

Here is link to knight off the wizard's site, for those of you without PHB2.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060501a&page=2

It is a tank from an online rpg, basicly it just causes agro (keeps bad guy on him) and has strong defense abilities higher AC and such.

Warlock with it's endless blasts and spell-like abilities is another class I think is strongly based on video games. Not to mention the aura's of the Dragon Shawman from PHB2 and the aura's from paladins in diablo, they even have one just like thorns.

I am not commenting of the power or balance issues of these classes, just I want my game (D&D) to be inovative and influence other mediums not the other way around.

 

[Paraxis]

Just realized I posted this under Rules, sorry could some kind moderator move it for me please.

 

[RigaMortus2]

The great thing about D&D is, you don't have to use every splatbook they come out with. If you think the Knight, Warlock and Dragon Shaman are too video gamey, don't allow them. Problem solved.

 

[Canaan]

Riga, that doesn't solve the problem he is talking about. He's talking about the evolution of the game as evidenced by these classes, not the classes themselves. And I strongly agree with his concern.

 

[shilsen]

Riga, that doesn't solve the problem he is talking about. He's talking about the evolution of the game as evidenced by these classes, not the classes themselves. And I strongly agree with his concern.

And some of us strongly disagree. Personally, I not only consider this concern an example of unnecessary elitism ("it's like a video game!" being one of the sillier complaints that gets trotted out on these boards), but I think that getting over-excited about a couple of elements in the game and extrapolating dire possibilities for the evolution of the game is an unfounded and knee-jerk reaction. The evolution of the game will always include some things that each of us doesn't care for, simply because our tastes differ. One of the great strengths of D&D is that one can play it many different ways, and one can use what one wants and discard what one doesn't without any real trouble.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The great thing about D&D is, you don't have to use every splatbook they come out with. If you think the Knight, Warlock and Dragon Shaman are too video gamey, don't allow them. Problem solved.

On the other hand, if you want a bit more "video gamey" feel (maybe you like video games a lot), you can use them.
Maybe such classes can even attract non RPG-fans to D&D (though that feels a bit doubtful, as the classes are not part of the core material).

But I think the classes aren't actually very video-gamey.

Tanks have always existed in RPGs, once armor becomes a viable and even strong form of defense.
The Knight's main fault are the metagaming aspects of the class (compare CR to level, blablabla... That's really something better reserved to a video game, where the computation is done in the background).

The Warlock isn't so video-gamey- most such video game classes usually have limited resources (Mana Points or whatever) to use their abilities, while the Warlock is clearly different in that area. In fact, I think that what makes him really interesting - he doesn't use a complicated spellcasting power replinishment system (which can easily be implemented in computer games, but are often hard to micro-manage in PnP)

 

[RigaMortus2]

Riga, that doesn't solve the problem he is talking about. He's talking about the evolution of the game as evidenced by these classes, not the classes themselves. And I strongly agree with his concern.

Evolution is part of the game. Again, you don't have to buy every single D&D book they come out with. If 4E has too many "video game" qualities for your taste, don't buy it. Stick with 3.X. Beleive it or not, there are people out there that don't even like 3E. They continue to play 1E and 2E D&D.

To each his own...

 

[Canaan]

And some of us strongly disagree. Personally, I not only consider this concern an example of unnecessary elitism ("it's like a video game!" being one of the sillier complaints that gets trotted out on these boards), but I think that getting over-excited about a couple of elements in the game and extrapolating dire possibilities for the evolution of the game is an unfounded and knee-jerk reaction. The evolution of the game will always include some things that each of us doesn't care for, simply because our tastes differ. One of the great strengths of D&D is that one can play it many different ways, and one can use what one wants and discard what one doesn't without any real trouble.

Shilsen, the author of this thread pointed out a concern over what he sees as an evolution of the game to a more video game type feel. He pointed out some facts to support his opinion and requested feedback. Your post merely says "you're wrong." Perhaps, if you approached it from a fact-based perspective, explaining why your opinion is the correct one, instead of the conclusionary and confrontational perspective you chose, your response would have more meaning and provoke more thought. [Political reference removed by admin]

 

[Liquidsabre]

Yea I'm not really seeing it. I don't think I've seen many original concepts/mechanics in video games that I haven't already seen elsewhere or in a table-top RPG. The knight class for one certainly doesn't have an "aggro" mechanic, so I'm not see the comparison there at all. Not sure what game the "knight" class comes from but I'm pretty sure there are stories and fairy tales that pre-date these [sarcasm]vastly original[/sarcasm] video games, and most likely seen as a class in older table-top RPGs first anyhow. I seem to recall auras being used in older editions of D&D, so again I don't really see how video games have somehow made this idea "original". Just because you haven't seen them, doesn't mean it hasn't already been done before after all.

About the only place I've really seen a video game really influence an RPG was KotoR and lot's of great things came out of those fan-based adaptations. WoW also has it's own RPG spawned from the PC game as well, good stuff. Besides, marketing across video game, board games, RPGs, movies, and TV is all very good for companies looking to be successful. So expect these companies and business folk to support good ideas had by designers in one area and coaxing it's spread into other areas. It's kind just how the media/marketing world works. Originality is overrated anyhow, I much prefer to have a product/mechanic/game/etc. that is of a high quality as opposed to being entirely original anyhow. So why the hang up?

 

[shilsen]

Shilsen, the author of this thread pointed out a concern over what he sees as an evolution of the game to a more video game type feel. He pointed out some facts to support his opinion and requested feedback. Your post merely says "you're wrong." Perhaps, if you approached it from a fact-based perspective, explaining why your opinion is the correct one, instead of the conclusionary and confrontational perspective you chose, your response would have more meaning and provoke more thought.

I'm not seeing anything in his post which asks for feedback. It simply read as a complaint, using one or two examples to make a really broad set of assertions. So there's really not much basis for me to argue against, and I'm not particularly interested in changing his mind. My basic point was that if he thinks something is video-gamey in D&D, he doesn't have to use it.