WoW and 4e - where's the beef?

[Rechan]

4E definitely pushes Roll over Role as the first thing a new player experiences in the game.

The rules are the first thing any new player comes up against. They are the first thing any new player has to learn. They are what you have to spend time teaching. They are the majority of the book in the first place.

You don't spend 90% of the character creation process detailing story, you do it crunching numbers, picking feats, alotting weapon/non-weapon proficiencies or skill points, and noting spells.

Actually, I did quite a bit, but did not mention it as the discussion is on 4E, not 3E.

Which is then very ungenuine. You made the complaint about 4e and builds, and yet it happened with 3e. So what was your point?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I wouldn't necessarily say fluff is easy to make. But the thing is - there is tons of fluff already available to us. I am not sure I could come up with one of Grim Tales, the Greek mythology or Harry Potter. But this stuff already exists, it is there. Some of the fluff that is out there we like, it inspires us. And so we want to use it. If the game comes with its own fluff, it might appeal to us, too. But it might also distract us from what we really want in fluff.

A big part of roleplaying is that we can imagine being in a world like in stories, novels or movies we have already seen and we are familiar with. I doubt many are attracted to an RPG in general because they offer a different way to use dice, paper and pencils. We are in for pretending to be an Elf or being a wise Wizard or a powerful swordsman, like [insert famous literary or move character here]. Good fluff is subjective - maybe it evokes the right image of a wise Wizard, or exactly the wrong. ("Huh, preparing spells? Why do I not need a Staff to cast spells, every Wizard needs spells? And why are their Greek and Viking Gods in the same campaign? I don't like Zeus! Why are fey from a different reality. Why do demons and devils fight each other, I thought they were basically the same?")

It happens to be that the fluff in 4E does resonate better with me than the fluff of 3E. But if it did not, I might also be annoyed in having to "forget" the stuff or work around it when considering a published adventure.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

No the FIRST thing is chapter 1, and it's the best damn RP advice chapter 1 EVER in a D&D PHB.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Which is then very ungenuine. You made the complaint about 4e and builds, and yet it happened with 3e. So what was your point?

We are discussing WOW and 4E, and I was comparing them. Another poster brought up the 3E stuff, not I.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well, I'm gonna leave this thread now. I've said what I want to say.

 

[Rechan]

We are discussing WOW and 4E, and I was comparing them. Another poster brought up the 3E stuff, not I.

And if the comparison between WoW and 4e also applies to 3e, than it isn't something specific to 4e, but of D&D.

WoW and 4e also have classes. I guess the fact that all editions of D&D have classes doesn't matter because the only thing being discussed is whether 4e.

 

[Nymrohd]

The problem is, 4E and basic, core books take a lot for granted still. The PHB does a woeful job of explaining to prospective players how to play D&D beyond the combat rules, Not just the 4E PHB, but the 3E, 3.5 and AD&D ones too. Does the 4E PHB even have a combat description? (The AD&D one had the best of those imo). For a game that desperately needs to approach a new generation it simply is not friendly to new groups. If you give all the books to a young group of people none of which has any experience with roleplaying, do you think they will even manage to play D&D? Would they even try when they can have fun with games with far more obvious gameplay?

I think this is the biggest difference 4E and D&D in general has with a succesful videogame like WoW (or heck with any good game). Gameplay is not intuitive and is badly guided. While there is to some extend a learning curve for combat encounters, there is no learning curve for the roleplaying experience. The podcasts are probably the best thing they've done on that level.

 

[Hereticus]

That's not what TwinBahamut was saying at all. He said the common conception of "fun" was evolving with time. You somehow took that and bent it into meaning that video games are driving that evolution, a statement that I don't think can be supported. Especially by someone who self-describes as knowing absolutely nothing about video games.

That assumption of yours is not what I said at all, please go back and read.

 

[wedgeski]

If you give all the books to a young group of people none of which has any experience with roleplaying, do you think they will even manage to play D&D?

Of course they would. It may not be the D&D you play, but it would be D&D.

Would they even try when they can have fun with games with far more obvious gameplay?

This is a very different question that applies broadly to table-top roleplaying as a whole. Nothing you can do to a coffee-table rule-book will ever fix this problem.

The podcasts are probably the best thing they've done on that level.

Agreed entirely!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The problem is, 4E and basic, core books take a lot for granted still. The PHB does a woeful job of explaining to prospective players how to play D&D beyond the combat rules, Not just the 4E PHB, but the 3E, 3.5 and AD&D ones too. Does the 4E PHB even have a combat description? (The AD&D one had the best of those imo). For a game that desperately needs to approach a new generation it simply is not friendly to new groups. If you give all the books to a young group of people none of which has any experience with roleplaying, do you think they will even manage to play D&D? Would they even try when they can have fun with games with far more obvious gameplay?

I suspect it would work well for beginners. But since I don't have a focus group to study, that's all guessing.