Why is 4e like World of Warcraft?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Instead of casting a spell or swinging a sword really hard, you use powers. It doesn't get much more videogamey than this. Am I supposed to hit triangle +R1 to do my daily power or do I roll a d20?

Oh, you're right. 3E is like a video-game. Just recently, I played Never Winternights 2. To activate my Rage Power, I just had to push a button. And I wanted to trip someone, guess what, I had to push a button!

3) Every class has a basic progression that is only slightly modified by abilitiy scores and feats. All the powers are very similiar. They do similar damage for each level for each class. The main differces are: I move this guy one square this way, he can't move for 1 round, or you get a +2 to hit him. It feels like building a video game character by picking talents from talen trees.?

Totally the same, dealing 3d6 points of electricity damage to a 10 ft wide area, or dealing 3d6 points of weapon damage and pushing a target 10 ft. Absolutely the same, no difference in mechanics or flavor. TOTALLY.
Or, see, healing a guy 1/4 of his hit points is totally the same as tumbling through the battlefield and avoiding enemy hits. Absolutely the same.

Come on, don't be ridiculous.

This isn't even an MMORPG conversion - I haven't played WoW, but I bet that playing a Paladin or a Ranger feel very different, even if they might both be able to "DPS" and deal the same damage per second after that.

I think there are some valid comparisons, but ultimiately they all lead back to the fact that MMORPGs and Table Top RPGs are related (MMORPGs being the "kin" of RPGs), and that both are games, and thus have to face the challenges very game has to challenge.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I'm just getting back into D&D with 4E and I find all of the verbiage on the boards like "character build" and "optimization" kind of strange. That stuff seems straight out of video games and not tabletop RPG's. In the old days, I always "made" or "developed" characters.

We call them toons now, grandad.

 

[Xsjado]

The two main issues that keep coming up are balance and class roles. I don't see either of those as inherently mmo-like.

Balance: The theoretical perfect RPG should have all classes balanced in such a way that a player can choose to play the character he wants and not be mechanically penalised for that choice. Both MMOs and DnD are RPGs so they should both be striving towards this goal. In my opinion, DnD has a better record of this than WoW. At least in 3e you knew where you stood in regards to batmen, in WoW the constant rebalancing *cough*nerfing*cough* tends to detract from the game as one temporary fix after another is slapped onto the engine.

Character roles: These existed in all versions of DnD, this is just the first edition where it is stated explicitly. 3e groups had the Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard combo. You could substitute similar classes into those roles but the archetypes persisted. Of course you didn't have to follow that pattern in 3e but you don't have to in 4e either. There is no rule that says "Any adventuring party must contain a Controller, Leader, Striker and Defender". Better definition of existing characteristics within the game does not make it suddenly like WoW.

MMORPGs are called that for a reason: they are RPGs just like DnD and so both have similar goals, just in different contexts. Regardless of mechanical similarities a tabletop RPG is always going to feel different from a computer game. The problem is that its easy to argue about rigidly defined rules but hard to compare subjective experiences in a social setting. If you want to play DnD as a wargame then its going to feel more like a computer game, conversely it is possible to get a very extended roleplaying experience out of MMOs.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

Divisive and Aggressive? LoL. Sorry guys, I wasn't trying to be a "player hater". I was using the term literally, meaning I wanted people who actually hated 4e to come in here and comment, not people who mildly dislike it.

Oh, and I thought it was pretty clear I'm not trying to start a fight when my first post contains "lol no fighting".

Should I have said "person who hates 4e" or "person who really truly and passionately dislikes 4e"? I don't really see a big difference. That's a little too PC, and it makes me kind of sad. I guess there is a glut of posters using "hater" as an insult, as if they were a rapper? *chuckles* I won't use it again, but seriously, that's some funny stuff.

@ me pulling aggro, yeah, I agree with the awesome. It's pretty ironic, too.

 

[Philodox00]

You're talking about EverQuest, not WoW. WoW is full of cat drurids, shadow priests and warriors who don't even own a shield.

Concepts still stand tho. Cat Druids, Shadow Priests and Fury Warriors, at the end of the day, are just different flavors of DPS.

 

[Orius]

Well, I have since changed my mind about it, as I've found the giddy joy at having new verandas to explore

Bah, 4e and its newfangled elements! Back in the old days we had our gazebos and we LIKED them!

(um... I think the word you were looking for is venues ).

 

[Kichwas]

...stuff...

I'll just hit your points in series, even though none of them are what is important in comparing the two things. You've basically picked the weak similarities and then argued why they don't apply, rather than addressing the key issues.


Talent points of a WoW character are something you've glossed over here. They pretty much are the equivs of the feat builds of a DnD toon.

Gear dependency in the two games is about the same. And there are other MMOs that are much less gear dependent (Guild Wars and City of Heroes to name two - GW's is gear dependent, but the gear is identical for everyone, and near free, so it really isn't).

WoW rewards from combat and quests. DnD rewards from combat and quests.

PCs in DnD are special. Pay attention to your quests in WoW - you're special too. In both cases, all the specialness is a fantasy in your head unless you do something with it.

Balance. WoW and DnD are about the same here as well. Both claim it, both do a decent job on the surface, both has issues in the details due to being complex engines that have an unpredictable human element.


Now, some of the things you skipped:

- Combat aggro. This is probably minor on some people's minds, but I find it major. DnD is the only table top RPG with an aggro system. That's a "revolution" in table top roleplay to give players the ability to dictate who NPCs will attack. It will result in a massive change in tactics. To see an interesting aspect of this issue, play Guild Wars for a bit - an MMO -without- an aggro system. Guild Wars plays like old DnD did in the combat - the monsters try to geek the mage, the rogues try to sneak around things, archers try to shoot from afar while monsters try to melee them, and fighters have to use body blocking and trip attacks to keep mobs off the 'clothies'...

Try being a 'tank' in Guild Wars after you've been a tank in WoW.

Or better, the other way around - learn MMO tanking Guild Wars like I did, and then go into WoW and realize that all the other tanks learned how to do it with a big EZ button while you can do everything they do without that button, plus use that button for added effect. As a person who does endgame instancing in both MMOs, I have little respect for WoW tanks.

That's how's 4e's going to feel like for people who've learned to play a fighter back before it had an aggro-button... EZ-mode.

Ok, a lot of space on one point... Lets be briefer on some of the others.

The typed roles.
Defender = tank
Striker = DPS
Controller = CC
Leader = well, Paragon in Guild Wars. Party buffer basically. That -is- a role in WoW, but not a publicly recognized one as it get spread between a couple of toons.

WoW's role of healer is not on the list, but... in the City of Heroes MMO you also lack Healer and have something more like a Leader. CoHs calls the role 'Controller' but it works like what DnD calls Leader - buffs, debuffs, and heals.

This is a major change for DnD. In the past DnD group did have a set of roles, but they were not so strongly typed. You did want some melee DPS, ranged DPS, heals, and a brain (the toon with all the knowledge skills). Often you needed a face (social skills) too, but DnD players frequently skip this one or fold it into one of the others.


The powers... they're structured very differently. When even you 'auto attack' is a power - it's just more like an MMO than an RPG. Old DnD had manuevers and they were varied and people tried all sorts of things. New DnD makes even 'basic attack' a power that everyone gets for free (and which took me 10 minutes to find). The presentation is just fundamentally different even if for many actions the result is the same. This is a paradigm shift more than a mechanic shift, but outside of basic attack it -IS- a mechanic shift as well.

Going to hit submit now and come back later when I've got more of the notions ready, and read the rest of the thread before I do in case my thoughts are already covered... But there is more.

 

[Kichwas]

I wanted people who actually hated 4e to come in here and comment, not people who mildly dislike it.

Oh, and I thought it was pretty clear I'm not trying to start a fight when my first post contains "lol no fighting".

Thing is... you can't mix these two.

Despite the tone of the many posts I've been making so far... I would not put myself in the hate or even dislike camp.

I'm in the 'very skeptical about this new RPG that is not DnD no matter what the name on the cover says' camp. Very skeptical for me means I ask a lot of very tough questions about the thing, find as many of its faults as I observe, try hard to avoid any fanboyism, and then see if despite all that I can still like it.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'll just hit your points in series, even though none of them are what is important in comparing the two things. You've basically picked the weak similarities and then argued why they don't apply, rather than addressing the key issues.


Talent points of a WoW character are something you've glossed over here. They pretty much are the equivs of the feat builds of a DnD toon.

Gear dependency in the two games is about the same. And there are other MMOs that are much less gear dependent (Guild Wars and City of Heroes to name two - GW's is gear dependent, but the gear is identical for everyone, and near free, so it really isn't).

WoW rewards from combat and quests. DnD rewards from combat and quests.

PCs in DnD are special. Pay attention to your quests in WoW - you're special too. In both cases, all the specialness is a fantasy in your head unless you do something with it.

Balance. WoW and DnD are about the same here as well. Both claim it, both do a decent job on the surface, both has issues in the details due to being complex engines that have an unpredictable human element.


Now, some of the things you skipped:

- Combat aggro. This is probably minor on some people's minds, but I find it major. DnD is the only table top RPG with an aggro system. That's a "revolution" in table top roleplay to give players the ability to dictate who NPCs will attack. It will result in a massive change in tactics. To see an interesting aspect of this issue, play Guild Wars for a bit - an MMO -without- an aggro system. Guild Wars plays like old DnD did in the combat - the monsters try to geek the mage, the rogues try to sneak around things, archers try to shoot from afar while monsters try to melee them, and fighters have to use body blocking and trip attacks to keep mobs off the 'clothies'...

Try being a 'tank' in Guild Wars after you've been a tank in WoW.

Or better, the other way around - learn MMO tanking Guild Wars like I did, and then go into WoW and realize that all the other tanks learned how to do it with a big EZ button while you can do everything they do without that button, plus use that button for added effect. As a person who does endgame instancing in both MMOs, I have little respect for WoW tanks.

That's how's 4e's going to feel like for people who've learned to play a fighter back before it had an aggro-button... EZ-mode.

Ok, a lot of space on one point... Lets be briefer on some of the others.

The typed roles.
Defender = tank
Striker = DPS
Controller = CC
Leader = well, Paragon in Guild Wars. Party buffer basically. That -is- a role in WoW, but not a publicly recognized one as it get spread between a couple of toons.

WoW's role of healer is not on the list, but... in the City of Heroes MMO you also lack Healer and have something more like a Leader. CoHs calls the role 'Controller' but it works like what DnD calls Leader - buffs, debuffs, and heals.

This is a major change for DnD. In the past DnD group did have a set of roles, but they were not so strongly typed. You did want some melee DPS, ranged DPS, heals, and a brain (the toon with all the knowledge skills). Often you needed a face (social skills) too, but DnD players frequently skip this one or fold it into one of the others.


The powers... they're structured very differently. When even you 'auto attack' is a power - it's just more like an MMO than an RPG. Old DnD had manuevers and they were varied and people tried all sorts of things. New DnD makes even 'basic attack' a power that everyone gets for free (and which took me 10 minutes to find). The presentation is just fundamentally different even if for many actions the result is the same. This is a paradigm shift more than a mechanic shift, but outside of basic attack it -IS- a mechanic shift as well.

Going to hit submit now and come back later when I've got more of the notions ready, and read the rest of the thread before I do in case my thoughts are already covered... But there is more.

That's a good list of comparisons. They don't make D&D 4 like WoW, though, I think.

On Aggro:
4E has no Aggro-mechanic like WoW. It has something with a similar goal, but it's different.
In World of Warcraft, Aggro is basically something like damage dealt. Special abilities artificially increase these aggro for the "tanks". A monster attacks the target with the highest Aggro. The actual danger the Tank poses to the monster is not the same as the aggro value. it is an artifically inflated value.

4E does not force a monster to attack only the Defender. It makes it a good choice, but attacking someone else is not forbidden. If you choose to ignore the defender, you take penalties (or even attacks). The Defender is dangerous, and not just pretending to be so.

I think that is a very important distinction. Even if the mark-mechanic itself is ultimately very abstract and "gamist", the "virtual aggro" is not virtual. It is real. If you don't attack the Defender, you actually take more damage.

This is ultimately the difference between WoW Aggro and D&D 4 "stickiness".

 

[fiddlerjones]

The distinction I see is that 4E mechanics are concerned more with making the game theatrical and fun(in some ways, this is much like video game RPG combat) rather than "logical." There is no "reason" you can only use daily powers once per day or encounter powers once per encounter. D&D has become much less simulationist, and I personally consider this a move in the right direction. This just puts an additional layer of responsibility on the DM and the players to imagine why things work in the game world.

As far as the roles feeling the same, the only one I've seen to suffer from this issue is Leader. Playing a Warlord seems very similar to playing a Cleric, but, for example, playing a Rogue looks very different from playing a Warlock.