Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xsjado" data-source="post: 4273564" data-attributes="member: 67574">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 &quot;Any adventuring party must contain a Controller, Leader, Striker and Defender&quot;. 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xsjado, post: 4273564, member: 67574"] 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 [I]character[/I] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification