D&D 4E What D&D 4e Should Learn From World of Warcraft
- Thread starter mxyzplk
- Start date
cignus_pfaccari
First Post
Jack99 said:
I'm going to third that.
Building a character is one of the strengths of PnP games like D&D. Feel free to include pregen characters (like the ones that'll come with the intro adventure, say?), but the point that's required, is the point that it stops being an RPG and becomes a board game.
Brad
Raloc
First Post
I think WoW serves more as a guide what NEVER ever to do in D&D, than anything remotely worth looking up to. WoW is basically the mechanics of Everquest with a new "skin" of Warcraft. The gameplay is very shallow (press 1 to auto attack, then press 2 through 0 to use your abilities in the most advantageous order, and repeat until [creature] is dead, or go collect 50 [insertcreaturenamehere] teeth for gold/item/xp reward), there is very little to no roleplaying (OMG he said "hail", we're roleplaying now!) and it's essentially the same thing from the minute you start playing until you've reached the endgame, except with different 3d models representing enemies from time to time. (Edit) Also, the world is 100% static. Nothing you can do as a player changes a single bit of information about the world (well, technically untrue since you can "drop" items and crap). If you kill this BBEG, he will respawn shortly afterwards, after the corpse of the clone you just killed disappears into sparkly oblivion.
If D&D were to be turned into
[Edit: Added post battle gameplay breakdown.]
If D&D were to be turned into
I know I would personally never play the game again.
[Edit: Added post battle gameplay breakdown.]
Last edited:
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
I agree with the OP's assertion that WoW is popular, and that some of the elements that make WoW popular should be explored for 4E. But some of the particulars I disagree with.
This is one reason why WoW rules, and 4E is apparently integrating this reason.
Azeroth is okay, but no better than most other worlds. Also, WoW (at first) presents the depth of Azeroth very gradually, through missions, NPC text, items, and the vistas of Azeroth itself. The rest of the depth of the world is revealed at the gamer's choice of pace: the gamer has to seek out lore on websites and strat guides and whatnot.
This is similar to the way 4E seems to be. They present the bare minimum of info in the PHB--about the same amount of info that you'd see in WoW's chargen screens. Then the rest of the setting is revealed during play, by the DM.
I think 4E's approach to setting depth is therefore almost exactly like WoW's approach. It'd be a mistake to bog down the rulebooks with excessive fluff. And doing so would be a huge departure from the way WoW paces and presents setting info.
This comes down to DM and player style. Some groups see D&D as a series of combats that are loosely strung together by narrative. Some groups are more into the roleplaying, and combat is a rare event.
I guess the D&D equivalent of "instant action" is D&D Minis.
I recall reading something about early discussions of 4E, where the designers considered casting the DM in an adversarial role. I'm glad they went the other way. PvP is a terrible idea for a tabletop roleplaying game. It can be fun for a board game setting, or for one-shot sessions, but it should not be a major component of the core game.
Your 5 year old isn't playing WoW; she's clicking a mouse around and watching the actions on screen.
I'd call that equivalent to her picking up minis and moving them around a battlemat. That's not playing D&D.
But yeah, pace of information delivery and user interface are big reasons for WoW's success. D&D 4E should likewise be well-designed, well-written, and have excellent presentation. It should have a usable index, glossary, and elegant chapter structure. It should be printed on quality paper in a nice font with fantastic art.
As for ease of play, I think D&D 4E should definitely come with pre-gen characters and a pre-gen adventure. The rumored re-spec rules should help with ease of play. Same for the stated goals of making feat choices less critical to character effectiveness (the paradigm is that feats enhance abilities, as opposed to 3E's paradigm of feats providing abilities).
Well, D&D (any edition) has WoW beat in this category. In WoW, I can't become king. I can't explore the ocean. I can't travel the planes, raze a town, build a cathedral. WoW is fundamentally limited to actions that the programmers have programmed. Sure, I can fish. But can I whittle?
WoW wins this one. The game has thousands of items. Each one looks cool, has different perks and abilities, and so on. Collecting ever-better loot is the crack that keeps people coming back for more.
I disagree that D&D should adopt the phat lewt system. I'm glad items are less important than they were in 3E. Characters should be heroes because of their inherent abilities and accomplishments, not because they've gotten lucky with monster drops.
But I do agree that loot should look cool. And a good DM will, when describing treasure, take time to make each item unique. That +2 Str boost item could be a pair of blacksmith's leather mittens, or fingerless cowhide gloves with studded knuckles of tarnished copper, or gleaming steel plate gauntlets, or strips of consecrated cloth wrapped around the hands, or whatever. I'm running a Savage Tide campaign on the Isle of Dread, and all the loot is tribal and primitive: the generic "Headband of Intellect +2" is a headdress made of brilliantly-colored Terror Bird feathers, the "Cloak of Resistance" is composed of Phanaton pelts, the "+1 Sword" is a stick with chunks of razor-sharp enchanted obsidian lodged all along the edges, and so on.
Point is: yes D&D can learn from other successful games, but it should absolutely not try to duplicate the WoW experience. They're both fantasy games, but they're played on fundamentally different platforms.
mxyzplk said:
This is one reason why WoW rules, and 4E is apparently integrating this reason.
Azeroth is okay, but no better than most other worlds. Also, WoW (at first) presents the depth of Azeroth very gradually, through missions, NPC text, items, and the vistas of Azeroth itself. The rest of the depth of the world is revealed at the gamer's choice of pace: the gamer has to seek out lore on websites and strat guides and whatnot.
This is similar to the way 4E seems to be. They present the bare minimum of info in the PHB--about the same amount of info that you'd see in WoW's chargen screens. Then the rest of the setting is revealed during play, by the DM.
I think 4E's approach to setting depth is therefore almost exactly like WoW's approach. It'd be a mistake to bog down the rulebooks with excessive fluff. And doing so would be a huge departure from the way WoW paces and presents setting info.
This comes down to DM and player style. Some groups see D&D as a series of combats that are loosely strung together by narrative. Some groups are more into the roleplaying, and combat is a rare event.
I guess the D&D equivalent of "instant action" is D&D Minis.
I recall reading something about early discussions of 4E, where the designers considered casting the DM in an adversarial role. I'm glad they went the other way. PvP is a terrible idea for a tabletop roleplaying game. It can be fun for a board game setting, or for one-shot sessions, but it should not be a major component of the core game.
Your 5 year old isn't playing WoW; she's clicking a mouse around and watching the actions on screen.
I'd call that equivalent to her picking up minis and moving them around a battlemat. That's not playing D&D.But yeah, pace of information delivery and user interface are big reasons for WoW's success. D&D 4E should likewise be well-designed, well-written, and have excellent presentation. It should have a usable index, glossary, and elegant chapter structure. It should be printed on quality paper in a nice font with fantastic art.
As for ease of play, I think D&D 4E should definitely come with pre-gen characters and a pre-gen adventure. The rumored re-spec rules should help with ease of play. Same for the stated goals of making feat choices less critical to character effectiveness (the paradigm is that feats enhance abilities, as opposed to 3E's paradigm of feats providing abilities).
Well, D&D (any edition) has WoW beat in this category. In WoW, I can't become king. I can't explore the ocean. I can't travel the planes, raze a town, build a cathedral. WoW is fundamentally limited to actions that the programmers have programmed. Sure, I can fish. But can I whittle?
WoW wins this one. The game has thousands of items. Each one looks cool, has different perks and abilities, and so on. Collecting ever-better loot is the crack that keeps people coming back for more.
I disagree that D&D should adopt the phat lewt system. I'm glad items are less important than they were in 3E. Characters should be heroes because of their inherent abilities and accomplishments, not because they've gotten lucky with monster drops.
But I do agree that loot should look cool. And a good DM will, when describing treasure, take time to make each item unique. That +2 Str boost item could be a pair of blacksmith's leather mittens, or fingerless cowhide gloves with studded knuckles of tarnished copper, or gleaming steel plate gauntlets, or strips of consecrated cloth wrapped around the hands, or whatever. I'm running a Savage Tide campaign on the Isle of Dread, and all the loot is tribal and primitive: the generic "Headband of Intellect +2" is a headdress made of brilliantly-colored Terror Bird feathers, the "Cloak of Resistance" is composed of Phanaton pelts, the "+1 Sword" is a stick with chunks of razor-sharp enchanted obsidian lodged all along the edges, and so on.
Point is: yes D&D can learn from other successful games, but it should absolutely not try to duplicate the WoW experience. They're both fantasy games, but they're played on fundamentally different platforms.
I largely agree with you, and if they ever remake that D&D MMO, they should definitely do what you said, but I thought D&D 4e is a rule-set with graphical user interface and not an MMO. As such, many things are largely dependent on the DM, no matter the settings. So your insights are probably better served as suggestions for DMs on how to make the game fun for the WoW generation.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
Raloc, you do know we're talking about WoW, and not EQ1, right? You've got some factual errors in there that would be right about EQ1, but don't carry over into WoW.
Raloc
First Post
WoW is essentially EQ(1) with a Warcraft "skin" as I said (and the token "quests" which I don't count, since they're largely ineffectual). The gameplay (combat) is pretty much identical (i.e., target a mob, press 1 through 0 (assuming you have your hotkeys set up in order) and repeat ad naseum).Whizbang Dustyboots said:
Edit(if my cred is in doubt): I was in the beta of both games, and have played both extensively, and known people on the WoW team. I follow MMOGs in order to see when they'll finally leave the dull, pointless gameplay of EQLikes (WoW etc.) behind. Also, I'm not sure which of my comments don't apply. EQ and WoW both have auto-attack, both have abilities triggered by hotkeys, both have respawning mobs in a static world.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
