Why D&D Is Better Than World of Warcraft

[Gort]

Generally speaking, I get more free pizza playing D&D.

Will fourth ed improve on this for me?

 

[The Eternal GM]

Generally speaking, I get more free pizza playing D&D.

Will fourth ed improve on this for me?

Now that right there is some fine and logical decision making!

 

[Blackwind]

I think rules-lite games that encourage roleplaying and creativity don't sell.

Can't argue with that. Nevertheless, I wonder why these games don't sell. Is it because they're less fun, or appeal to less people due to some other factor inherent in their nature? Or is it because they have no marketing or brand recognition behind them? Or is it both?

Personally, I think the OP raises an interesting question with regard to 3E/4E emphasis on miniatures, battle mat, tactical combat, et al. Back in the 2E days, we never used minis or a grid. With 3E, we've used these tools since day one, and if we move to 4E we will undoubtedly continue to do so. But I've noticed a change in my own play experience: back in the 2E days, before we used minis or a mat, I used to visualize the action much more strongly. Now, my attention is mostly on the combat grid, and although I still 'see' the action to a certain extent, it's not as vivid as it once was, when there was no 'game board' to look at.

 

[Incenjucar]

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.

 

[Hussar]

2. Though there need to be rules to balance it, encourage players to create their own spells, magic items, craft their equipment, etc. I saw way more player-created spells in the 2e era than I ever saw in the 3e era.

I never really thought about it, but, I do think you're right. However, I think you ignore the reasons why. There's simply far and away more material available to a 3e gamer than a 2e gamer. Between WOTC and the third party publishers, there's easily several times more material on any given subject that a gamer could think of.

3000 plus feats at last count wasn't it?

But, I do agree with the idea. Rules for creating new stuff should be included. However, that idea only appeals to the tinkers in the hobby. There's a very large number of gamers who are perfectly content to just play and could care less about making new stuff. Making new stuff should be an option, perhaps even encouraged, but never, ever expected.

3. Teach people some damn role-playing. OK fine, so sure, if people don't want to get into that they don't have to, but increasingly the "examples of play" read a lot more like "I rolled 8, did I hit?" than "I hack furiously at the wererat!" I own something on the order of 1000 RPG products and there are many games that, just in their core rules, set a stage that promotes role-playing. Again, without that D&D is always going to lose out to some computer thing that can "automate" the rules.

Meh, while I'll agree that lots of games do this, D&D never has. Kill stuff and take its loot was the mantra thirty years ago and it hasn't changed all that much.

And, it has an advantage. All those games that try to push role play, like Vampire for example, turn off gamers who aren't interested in it. The role players will always role play, regardless. But, if I'm forced to role play, I'll find something else to do.

In my mind, a great thing to do would be to actually move that example of play from the DMG, where no one ever reads it, into the PHB where EVERYONE should read it. Why is the play example stuck in the backwaters of the DMG? It's ridiculous. The example of play should be in the first chapter of the PHB and should give about six different examples around the table.

 

[Firevalkyrie]

I think rules-lite games that encourage roleplaying and creativity don't sell.

I think the reason for that is: If the rules are so stripped down that you're basically acting free-form, you don't need the rules. Ergo, fewer sales.

The reason the dominant games in the market are crunch-medium (take this with a huge dose of IMO) is that there's a middle ground that's marketable and desirable where you have enough rules where you actually need them for something, but not so many that you can't remember the important ones at a moment's notice.

 

[Clavis]

I think rules-lite games that encourage roleplaying and creativity don't sell.

No game not called D&D will ever sell as well as any game called D&D. Rules light or rules heavy has nothing to do with it. When D&D was a lighter game (in its original version), it sold. Now that D&D is a heavier game, it sells. It's the name that sells the game. D&D IS roleplaying to everyone outside of the gaming community. Did anyone here start playing D&D because they heard about its rules and liked how they sounded? Or did you start playing D&D because of its reputation, or the fact that your friends were playing it?

Of course, the overly-complex rules can turn people off of the game, once they are exposed to them... By that time, WOTC already has that lost player's money, and will add their purchase to the company sales data, even though the player no longer plays the game.

 

[Clavis]

Generally speaking, I get more free pizza playing D&D.

Will fourth ed improve on this for me?

Not if you're playing on-line!
Also, DDI subscriptions could conceivably cut into the money available for pizza...

The most damning anti-4th edition arguement: it means less pizza!

To stay on topic, the total lack of pizza is what keeps me away from WOW!

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I think rules-lite games that encourage roleplaying and creativity don't sell.

I think you can attach features that encourage roleplaying and creativity to any rules-heavy game.

 

[Emirikol]

5 Senses in D&D: sight, smell (some good..some not so good), touch (including proprioception during dice handling), taste (share food), hearing (etc.) = full human interaction (including physical cues)

full human interaction is what it's about. Being able to pick up and handle miniatures. Use of the imagination is the crucial factor here too.

jh
Videogames, even with a headset, only compete on a "convenience" and "graphics" factor. They are much more popular for those two reasons..but we are the TV generations afterall