D&D 4E What D&D 4e Should Learn From World of Warcraft

Man in the Funny Hat said:
I play WoW and enjoy it for what IT is.

This. I love WoW. I like the variety of places to go and things to kill. I like reading the couple of paragraphs that give some context to going to those places and killing those things. It does a great job of fulfilling my urge to pretend I'm and elf and I'm kicking the crap out of some baddies, but that's where WoW ends.

Now, there's some overlap in what D&D IS and what WoW IS. It's the killing stuff and taking its loot part. WoW does killing stuff and taking its loot really well, and that's where D&D can learn from WoW. WoW learned from EQ that auto-attack is booooorrriiiiiiiiiinnnnggggg. To alleviate this, they gave everyone piles of different abilities and options in a fight. Moreso, they made all these sets of powers work in their own unique way with their own special rules. D&D should (and it looks like it will) take this mindset into account because standing still and full attacking is just as lame as sitting back with auto-attack.

Everywhere else, I don't see there being much that D&D can learn. Everything else WoW does, D&D does [measured only by the scope of your imagination] better.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

PeterWeller said:
This. I love WoW. I like the variety of places to go and things to kill. I like reading the couple of paragraphs that give some context to going to those places and killing those things. It does a great job of fulfilling my urge to pretend I'm and elf and I'm kicking the crap out of some baddies, but that's where WoW ends.

Now, there's some overlap in what D&D IS and what WoW IS. It's the killing stuff and taking its loot part. WoW does killing stuff and taking its loot really well, and that's where D&D can learn from WoW. WoW learned from EQ that auto-attack is booooorrriiiiiiiiiinnnnggggg. To alleviate this, they gave everyone piles of different abilities and options in a fight. Moreso, they made all these sets of powers work in their own unique way with their own special rules. D&D should (and it looks like it will) take this mindset into account because standing still and full attacking is just as lame as sitting back with auto-attack.

Everywhere else, I don't see there being much that D&D can learn. Everything else WoW does, D&D does [measured only by the scope of your imagination] better.
Well put. I agree completely, except I'm not sure D&D has anything to learn from WoW in regards killing stuff and taking its loot. I mean, the progression is like [Pre-D&D precursor stuff]->D&D->text adventures->MUDs(et al)->Everquest*->WoW. So really, WoW is essentially only what it inherited from D&D in terms of mechanics, which is a watered down, bastardized version of such, basically stripped of all the things that make it truly interesting (e.g., unique items of the DM's design that can't be easily made into game models.... Also, things that are heavily plot related, like a sword that has a lich's phylactery in its hilt or something).

* - The reason I have beef with WoW is that it's basically the mass market version of Everquest with a Warcraft skin. Most of the mechanics are essentially identical. There are some slight added touches like abilities that trigger differently and such, but it's essentially the same gameplay. Now my problem with this is that Everquest was literally meant to be a 3d MUD. Unfortunately, publishers have stupidly taken this to be the only viable type of MMOG. Thus the glut of MMOGs that are exactly like Everquest, even if it's totally inappropriate to the game type.
 

mxyzplk said:
The problem is, many of the things 4e seems to be borrowing from WoW aren't really the things that make it great, but instead the things that are design limitations. A simple example is respawning monsters and instanced dungeons. These are a "necessary evil" to make a game work in a massively multiplayer environment. No one wants that in D&D.

Well, respawning a dungeon like an MMO would make no sense in D&D, but that doesn't mean a dungeon that has been emptied stays empty. If not all the monsters have been cleared out, and they're intelligent, they can always call for reinforcments while the party heads back to town. To the players, there's no difference between Bob the orc and Joe the orc that they care about anyway.

Even if the players do wipe out a dungeon, there's always the potential for it to be repopulated. Maybe bandits will use it for a new base, a dragon might be in the market for a nice fixer-upper lair, etc. And of course if it's connected to the Underdark, who know what will come up from the depths?

Anyway, good DMs have always used this to some extent, and there's no reason 4e should change it. It makes the campaign world more dynamic.

2. Azeroth is a deep and interesting world. Even for those who weren't into the Warcraft series and don't know anything about the world's history and development, it's at least clear that it's a living, vibrant world that has a realistic feel derived from its evolution over time.
Unfortunately, the 4e direction seems to be away from this. Except for the Basic Set, D&D has shied away from having a setting tied to the core rules

One word: homebrewers. Ever since the early days there have always been players who used their own setting, whatever it was. I'd imagine there's enough homebrewers out there that would not be interested in an official setting and wouldn't bother with 4e if it was so closely tied to a setting that homebrewers wouldn't be able to use the world. They'd just use an earlier edition or d20 variant like C&C.

4. PvP. Sure, there's non-PvP servers, but everyone knows they're for noobs. This is sticky - I'm not sure the best way to incorporate PvP into D&D.

Simple: you don't. PvP has no place in D&D. Not only is it a matter of me not being able to stand PvP in most MMOs to begin with (basically the same 2 or 3 builds using the same cheap tactics with the same uber gear), but D&D is supposed to be a cooperative game and PvP flies directly in the face of it. The classes are built to work together and not gank each other.

And who wants all the player arguments that will ensue from PvP? It won't stay friendly, I can guarantee that. Why to you think DMs ban stuff like evil alignments and kender from their games?

7. Phat lewt. The 3e magic item economy where they're just about "same as cash" makes it very difficult to hand out cool magic, especially if it's not a pure power optimizer. It just gets sold and rendered into a raft of +1 items. WoW has some of this but it's a lot harder to tune MMO treasure to the particular group/characters than it is in D&D. In earlier editions of D&D, people usually had a magic item they were really proud of. Man, that 1e Unearthed Arcana barbarian who got that magic sword from the Forbidden City that could cast Heal once a week - he was hell on wheels. Not so much now, it's a matter of cost optimizing your armor, natural armor, dodge, and deflection bonuses. In WoW, strangers scope you out and compliment you when they see that blue or purple item.

My knee-jerk reaction to this is, "Monty Haul".

But that might not be accurate. And anyway, MMOs do have lots of different items, but nobody ever wants to use them, except for the powerful rare stuff you have to spend days camping. People don't go for the unique stuff on MMOs, they go for all the best uber gear, everything else is a waste of inventory. A lot of gameplay is PL to 70 as fast as you can and then get all the best stuff, while probably 95% of the rest of the stuff is ignored. In D&D's case, why should there be any conversion of most of the magic items? Just stick with stuff like +5 vorpal swords, portable holes and robes of the archmagi, because no one will even bother with that bag of tricks any more.

Corinth said:
Being able to do click two buttons, fill in a name, and then get going is a big strength for WOW and it should be just that easy to do in D&D: choose class, choose race, pick name, write down handful of gear/abilities and go.

I don't have a problem with this for inexperienced players. I'd rather roll up my own character, and I suspect that most long-time gamers would too, but having a character package like this is more helpful for players who don't know the system. Even having packages that aren't difficult to tweak might be useful for a veteran who just wants to come up with something quick, like rolling up a new character to replace a dead PC.

And lastly with the whole argument of the scope of WoW vs. D&D, sorry D&D wins, hands down. It doesn't matter what can happen in WoW, it's still a computer game and thus limited by its programming. This is a FACT, not an opinion. It cannot exceed its programming. Now the code itself might be very extensive and allow for a multitude of options, but it's still dumb computer code that can only do as it's told.

As for interplayer interactions, that's a different matter, the only real difference is that in a normal D&D game there's only about 4-8 PCs on average interacting, where a MMO will have thousands or even millions. It also ignores the fact that NPCs aren't as static in D&D as they are in an MMO. MMO NPCs largely exist as quest-givers, shops or enemies, and always serve that role, that way the noob who just joined up can take a quest that a player who's been on the server from Day 1 took when he first logged on the game for example. In D&D NPCs die, or they take a new role or whatever, theree's always the possibility that the DM will change things around, because the individual NPCs don't need to keep performing the same tasks ad infinitum.

I'm not bashing MMOs, there's lots of aspects of an MMO I like. I like exploring the worlds, fighting monsters, crafting items, finding treasaure, etc. I don't like grinding, and I don't like getting ganked by bored players who reached the level cap and get their kicks by killing low-level characters who don't have a snowball's chance in hell of fighting back.

But the fact is D&D or any other tabletop RPG isn't an MMO, and should always function as one either, since the two style of games have different needs in terms of gameplay.
 

The level of heat in this discussion is occasionally veering towards 'too heated', please make every effort to keep things cool in a discussion which clearly has adherents to both sides.

Thanks
 

Raloc said:
Do any of the mobs you kill there stay dead? No? Thought not. Static world.

Actually, yeah, there is a one-time opening event, and once you kill the mobs and bosses that spawn from it, they are dead permanently. You should wait for an answer to your question before going off with your snarky remark.
 

PeterWeller said:
This. I love WoW. I like the variety of places to go and things to kill. I like reading the couple of paragraphs that give some context to going to those places and killing those things. It does a great job of fulfilling my urge to pretend I'm and elf and I'm kicking the crap out of some baddies, but that's where WoW ends.

Ditto. Except that Elf thing.
 

The list that you can compile of things D&D can do that WoW can't is basically limitless while you can pretty much make a short list of the the stuff that WoW can accomplish that D&D can't.

Can you have sex with the barkeep in WoW..no
Destroy a nation...no
Can you kidnap the king and ransom him...my guess is no.

The list could go on for a really really long time.

Now the programmers could change this and add any of those..but I can imagine far more things than a programmer can keep up with.


Frankly the two games support different enjoyments. WoW is basically a very efficient, fun and colorful dungeon crawl.

It will always be limited by programming and creating a world that millions of players want to dungeoncrawl in.
 
Last edited:

The one thing D&D (and all tabletop and live-action RPGs) will always have over MMORPGs is in person social interaction. However much we want to pretend that interacting on-line is genuine social intercourse, it isn't. We don't know each other. All we know about each other is based on the content of our posts. We can't see each other's facial expressions, see each other's body language, or hear the subtle changes in voice pitch that convey feeling. We can't see what each other's wearing, or smell each other, or give and receive the thousands of small, unconscious signals that constitute genuine communication. Our bodies crave that kind of interaction, whether we are consciously aware of it or not. It's essential to our mental health.

I am NOT dismissing computer games. I love the Elder Scrolls series, for instance. I believe that D&D shouldn't try to do what computer games can do better. Instead, I think the game books should emphasize what computer games cannot do. The social aspect of a D&D game is part of that.

"Playing D&D" is as much about getting together, making jokes, eating food, drinking, flirting (if there's the appropriate mix of genders and sexual orientations) and using our imaginations, as it is about a rules set. If the rules are to be changed, they should be changed in ways that compliment the social aspect of D&D, and not distract from it. That's one way to lure the coveted and legendary female gamers into D&D, for instance. The one thing I really applaud WOTC for is the prominence they are giving to Shelly Mazzanoble's writings, which give voice to the understanding of D&D as a social activity, over and above any specific rules. As I've said before on these boards, most female players (for example) I've known barely care about the rules at all, and yet I've had some truly great, fun games roleplaying with them.

Tabletop and live-action games can easily survive, if the companies that produce them understand that they have already lost the war for tactical-style gaming. D&D will continue because everybody wants an excuse to down a few beers with friends and converse while pretending to lead lives much more exciting than are possible in our modern world.
 
Last edited:

Clavis said:
The one thing D&D (and all tabletop and live-action RPGs) will always have over MMORPGs is in person social interaction. However much we want to pretend that interacting on-line is genuine social intercourse, it isn't. We don't know each other.
I run two characters on two servers, each with a different group of "real life" friends who are also my D&D buddies (Wednesday night Red Hand of Doom with the Eitrigg guys, every second Friday Forgotten Realms with the Scarlet Monastery crew).

Turns out that we can insult each other just as easily over Skype as we can sitting around a table.
 


Remove ads

Top