Why D&D Is Better Than World of Warcraft

[Cadfan]

Well, naturally I disagree with almost everything posted here. Seems to be what I'm for.

First of all, D&D does tactical combat better than any MMORPG out there. D&D's tactical combat is VASTLY INFERIOR to the tactical combat available in a computerized wargame, but compared to an RPG, D&D wins. Sure, D&D can't handle the math involved in MMORPG combat. But honestly, how much does that math add? MMORPG combat tends to center around bars. You've got bars, I've got bars. One bar makes you lose if it runs out. I can spend parts of some bars to make your bars go down, and sometimes I can use one of my bars to make my other bars go up. We monkey with our bars for a while, and eventually someone wins.

D&D tactical combat, on the other hand, involves movement as a tactical tool, character placement as a tactical tool, larger fights, high degrees of character interaction, enemies which interact with one another, more enemies at once, complex terrain, interactive terrain (!!!), and a wide variety of special effects and character options. MMORPGs rarely offer any of these things.

Second, with regard to rules-lite games encouraging creativity. I've never seen how this is supposed to work. A rules-lite game is just as likely to encourage monotony as creativity. If there are no rules for climbing a wall, you've got two possible outcomes. First, that players "creatively" describe their wall climbing. Second, that players don't climb walls because there aren't any rules, and they either don't like playing Mother-May-I, or the game hasn't provided that spark of inspiration, that moment when the players look at their options, and think, "Oh, I can do this??" and try something new.

 

[Corinth]

Convenience trumps all other concerns. Solve that issue, and you save the hobby for another generation.

 

[mxyzplk]

This is like all those sci-fi forum threads comparing Star Trek and Star Wars ... a series and a film. D&D and WoW are even more disparate than that.

That's not the point of the thread (as, I'll note, reading the post and/or the post it references would make clear).

The point is - WoW and other MMOs do share the same general fantasy-oriented leisure niche. D&D has some things it could learn from WoW's success that might be relevant to its success. But also, it has some aspects that are advantages; that computer RPGs have more difficulty matching, that it might benefit from focusing on.

Because if all that D&D is consists of tactical combat - you really are a bit of a goon to play it rather than something like WoW. It's almost as social (voice chat's even built in) as a tabletop RPG, and you can easily get together for LAN parties to get the pizza-share aspect. It's not sustainable long term if everything that D&D is can be automated.

So I'm not necessarily championing "rules light". You can have rules crunch, but you need more than that. What are those things to add/focus on to leverage the uniqueness of tabletop play?

 

[Monkey Boy]

It may just be the usual "middle ground" thing.

Rules-light games probably get horrible repetitive because there's just not much to do with the mechanics, and nothing to really dwell on outside of the game.

With Exalted and, if I remember, other White Wolf games, so much is based on Stat 1 Dice+Stat 2 Dice.

And that's, like, a billion things. There's nothing to really consider.

With more complex games, you have much more intricacy to work with.

Also helps that the players can pull a bit of the power away from the GM, making them feel more active rather than just trying to kiss up like WoD games often require.

And yet you could make a case for WoD games being market leader while TSR was in it's death throws. Hmm... simple system, story driven, successful.

Interestingly last year Ryan Dancey commented on the evolution of DnD and the need to become more story driven.

 

[Dausuul]

Second, with regard to rules-lite games encouraging creativity. I've never seen how this is supposed to work. A rules-lite game is just as likely to encourage monotony as creativity. If there are no rules for climbing a wall, you've got two possible outcomes. First, that players "creatively" describe their wall climbing. Second, that players don't climb walls because there aren't any rules, and they either don't like playing Mother-May-I, or the game hasn't provided that spark of inspiration, that moment when the players look at their options, and think, "Oh, I can do this??" and try something new.

Rules-light games encourage creativity because they put the player in the mindset of "What would my character be able to do?" rather than "What do the rules say my character can do?" Because the system is loose and flexible, it's easy to think up some cool action you want to attempt, then let the GM slap together the mechanics to resolve it. Doing that in a rules-heavy game requires much more consideration, because of the potential for ripple effects. Everything is tightly integrated, so an improvised mechanic in one area can easily break the game someplace else.

More importantly, rules-heavy games demand much more focus on bookkeeping and rules interpretation. That takes away focus from the characters and the game world. When you spend half the session crunching numbers and considering your options under the rules, you're a lot less likely to think of options that aren't described by the rules. I've seen this firsthand in a group that went from a White Wolf game to D&D 3.5E--much more focus on character mechanics, much less on character persona.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Convenience trumps all other concerns. Solve that issue, and you save the hobby for another generation.

Winnah!

Even though everyone pontificates about all that other stuff, a few individuals state one of the most obvious reasons why WOW is more successful than D&D and more than likely will get completely ignored.

 

[Najo]

Frankly, any attempt at saying one is absolutely better than the other is futile. World of Warcraft is a different game than D&D that needs to be judged by different standards than D&D. Of course WoW will not hold up to D&D if both are judged by how much they are like D&D. D&D would suffer horribly if it is judged to how much it is like an MMORPG.

In the end, World of Warcraft is a game that entertains millions of people. These millions of people are probably quite happy with the game, and it is nothing but an insult to those people who enjoy that game for you to say that your game is better than theirs, that you are having more fun than them.

Actually, you can compare areas where one market is losing its customers to the other and which is more fun (by surveying those customers) and with fewer barriers to entry (by listing and measuring adaption obstacles). The rest is subjective.

 

[Najo]

What works for an employee - specialisation - doesn't work for a roleplaying game.

WotC's market research shows that all players want a number of disparate elements to be in place. These are:

* Strong Characters and Exciting Story
* Role Playing
* Complexity Increases over Time
* Requires Strategic Thinking
* Competitive
* Add on sets/New versions available
* Uses imagination
* Mentally challenging

You can streamline without losing depth of play, and you can have consolidated benefits where features are designed to scratch multiple itches/ meet interests at once. Rules lite and story driven so far have failed because they did do these things well. D&D players want options, not rules lite, is the main reason for this. Story built in without compromising tactical and balanced rules is very possible.

Both of these elements is the main reason WOTC is doing 4e. 3.5 became a bloated beast that couldn't draw in new players because of its barriers to entry.

 

[Najo]

This is like all those sci-fi forum threads comparing Star Trek and Star Wars ... a series and a film. D&D and WoW are even more disparate than that.

It's totally subjective. If you don't like academic things like reading and mathematics being involved in gameplay, WoW is better for you. If you don't mind that and you prefer a more malleable gameworld with more freedom of choice for your character (in other words, you like deep role-playing), D&D is better for you.

It is not about interests, its is about barriers to entry. Not all role-players want to do academics or reading. Roleplaying doesn't need heavy academics or reading to "work". D&D should accomendate casual players as much as possible to grow and survive. There are plenty of creative people who would play rpgs if they were more accessible.

D&D has to solve these issues to grow:

1) Creating new DMs

2) Veteran players helping or inviting new and young players to learn the game

3) New players starting groups or finding groups to join

4) Teaching/ Learning D&D without a group

5) Playing D&D with time and distance constraints of life and growing older

6) easy to learn basic rules and character creation with depth of play and choice as level progresses.

7) Visuals and writing that compete with video games and movies.

There is likely more, but these are the main ones off the top of my head. Just like WOW has D&D players who play it, there are WOW players who would enjoy playing D&D if they could easily access it. But you have to solve these issues first.

 

[Najo]

I think you are close to it, but not quite there. What World of Warcraft can do that D&D is not as good at is not the boring stuff. What it does better are any of the elements that humans tend to suck at.

I think it is a bit of what we both are talking about. Video games only do the non spotaneous programmed content. This tends to be repeative tasks. This is why player driven content (such as housing, guilds, pvp and vanity crafting) is so important to the long term success of a MMO. MMOs need emotionally invested players and unexpected events to give them more of a human reward and immersive experience. WOW actually is terrible at these features, which is ironic that Blizzard has dropped the ball there. What is left is software driven and scripted and ultimately boring content. D&D embraces imagination and creative storytelling methods well, and all role playing does well when it uses those strenghts to its advantage.

At any rate, I agree with all your points. I would just combine them to my own. I think the whole picture incorporates both of our opinions.