Why is 4e like World of Warcraft?

[Philodox00]

Do you see a reason why *not* to include it? The main point of it is giving individual classes more abilities to show their own niche.

On issues of style, flavor and other subjective reasons, I do. However, what blows your dress up, doesn't even make mine flutter. I just prefer a Fighter to grab a Ogre's attention by dousing it in some flaming Oil, Attempting to Trip it or even yelling out a challenge in some tounge in would understand ( Up to the DM of course ), rather then swing, miss with axe and then some how, the Ogre suffers these penalties.

However, as a rule mechanic in 4E, is great. It helps define the Fighter as a Defender and gives him a nifty power to use. I want to make it clear, my dislike for 4E isn't becuase I think the rules are "broken" or that it's some how inferior to some other edition.

Which, in turn, strengthens the story. Now, a lone fighter can protect his friends by blocking a doorway completely, the rogue is now more able than ever to be acrobatic and swashbucklery. That's more material for stories, in my opinion, more actual roleplaying in combat than before.

Isn't it funny, how two people can view the same in such different light? I don't like 4E combat at all. I felt like I was a playing a card game with minis, that was loosely based on a computer game. I don't like powers called, " Dire Wolverine Strike" or "Jaws of the Wolf." I also don't like 1 effect spans many powers, such as Sure Strike, Precise Strike and Exacting Strike are billed as 3 different powers, when the scaling is obvious ( STR+2 VS AC, STR+4 VS AC and STR+6 VS AC )

But hey, Have fun man.

 

[WhatGravitas]

But hey, Have fun man.

Definitely, as many things, it's mainly a matter of taste!

Cheers, LT.

 

[Kichwas]

How so? I disagree that 4e works in a more tabletop-like manner. To me it is as abstract and artificial as in WoW. How is it so in 4e only one mark at a time is RPG like?

All this means is that the Aggro system is 4E is closer to Everquest II's than it is to WoW's. It is still an aggro system. I forget how aggro works in City of Heroes - I never played a tank in that and back when I was playing that the word 'noob' was a very good description of me and MMOs.

Every MMO I have tried, except for Guild Wars, has an aggro system. They are all different in how they work.

Now DnD has one too. It doesn't work the same as the other MMOs, but it does work.


To the fanboyz fighting us so hard on this... Why? DnD being similar to WoW is neither a good nor bad statement in and of itself. You don't need to raise your hair up on this one. Figure out whether or not it is accurate without letting that become some judgment of the game.

The funniest thing about fanboy defense of the chosen idol is that they get into a tiff over anything and everything said that is either:
1. Said by 'marked' anti-fans or
2. Not worshiping praise, even when not an attack either.

I've seen this same thing with every new release from every game I've followed over the last 30 years in this hobby...

A few months in, the fanboyz figure out which of our statements were attacks and which weren't, and start agreeing on the neutral ones, or at least not fighting but simply disagreeing.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Defenders' powers make certain targets less appealing for the mobs. D&D has *always* had powers that do this such as mirror image, fire shield and a dwarf's bonus AC vs giants. So D&D has always had an aggro system.

1e = videogame-y

 

[Doug McCrae]

To the fanboyz fighting us so hard on this... Why? DnD being similar to WoW is neither a good nor bad statement in and of itself.

You've been away too long. On ENWorld these days to say that something is videogame-y or like WoW means that it sucks. It does *not* mean that it shares any features in common with any particular videogame or videogames in general.

See also 'anime' and 'fun'.

 

[xechnao]

Defenders' powers make certain targets less appealing for the mobs. D&D has *always* had powers that do this such as mirror image, fire shield and a dwarf's bonus AC vs giants. So D&D has always had an aggro system.

1e = videogame-y

Yes, combat tactics have been a part of D&D since 1e. People complain about the verisimilitude of these tactics. Modern videogames are abstract but they also invest on challenging through the interactive animated visual art. RPGs in theory are based on imagination and communication so this is not a problem unless the rules fundamentally work against this. This happens when you have gamey rules in conflict with a simulationist base that traditionally has been settling the rules of interacting with your imaginations on the table.

 

[AllisterH]

re: Experience

I'm not stating that my experience makes me some sort of expert but I just don't think we should automatically shout "WoW" anytime we see a feature that looks similar.

Take heart though...on the WoWboards, I and others constantly have to tell people that "NO, Tinker gnomes are NOT a warcraft invention. They ripped them off of Dragonlance".

Seriously, if you ask the average gamer on Warcraft's servers where Tinkertown came from, they assume that it was a Warcraft specific invention.

Now ain't THAT a kick in the pants to D&D....

 

[dagger]

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 HAVE played WoW and my Ranger in 4e is 3rd level.......it feels the same.

You don't go Ranger in 4e to be a tough outdoors type who is a master tracker (anyone can track now). You go ranger because you want to be the best Archer or Two Weapon Fighter, nothing else in the class description defines the Ranger in 4e in ANY OTHER WAY.

 

[meleeguy]

Explainer - Agro exists because AI doesn't

Orcs stand around until you get too close or whatever because that's the extent of technology - there is no human to decide they take cover and do other cunning things like play hide and seek with weapons. The story of invention is the story of survival, and no computer can as yet go there. They sure are trying though.

This is extremely dumb, yet it is one of those almost brilliant decisions as far as making money goes - just like ignoring most collisions. They make mmorpgs even possible in the first place, but the 'fun' had to be added in spite of these limitations. And true to their self-deterministic abilities, mmorpgs advanced.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I HAVE played WoW and my Ranger in 4e is 3rd level.......it feels the same.

Maybe I misunderstood the original post, but IIRC, the question is: Are Ranger and Paladin (in each game) the same, just because they share a similar power structure (4E with At-Will/Encounter/Daily/Utility) or can achieve the same "DPS" (WoW)?

You don't go Ranger in 4e to be a tough outdoors type who is a master tracker (anyone can track now). You go ranger because you want to be the best Archer or Two Weapon Fighter, nothing else in the class description defines the Ranger in 4e in ANY OTHER WAY.

Did you look at the Ranger Utility powers?
Thinks like: Cruicial Advice, Evade Ambush, Skilled Companion, Expeditious Stride. Undaunted Stride, Long Strider, Forest Ghost? Do they look Rangery to you, or do they look like Paladin, Two-Weapon Fighter or Archer powers?