WoW and 4e - where's the beef?

[TwinBahamut]

Funny!

No, like marking, healing surges, K3WL POW3RZZ for all classes, etc.

Like I said, their words, not mine.

This is a bit back in thread now, but...

I really don't see it. If anything, marking and healing surges are things that seem fairly unique to 4E. I have never seen anything quite like them anywhere else.

4E Marking, which lets you penalize an opponent who doesn't target your character, is simply unheard of outside of 4E. Just about every videogame that has defensive characters uses either some kind of active defense in which one character takes a blow for another (like the Final Fantasy "cover" ability), some kind of aggro/taunt mechanics that control what enemies target in the first place, some emphasize pure tactical positioning in order to protect weak characters (Fire Emblem does this very well), and many just rely on every character being tough enough that you can just use healing in order to keep everyone alive.

Similarly, I have certainly never seen anything like 4E Healing Surges, which mean that the amount of any given HP restoration ability is based on the target, rather than the healer's own capability, and that characters have a fixed number of times they can be healed per day. I mean, I have seen things somewhat like 4E's auto-restoration of HP at the end of every battle and effects like second wind, but I have never seen anything at all like healing surges. The closest example I can think of, the classic SaGa HP/LP system as seen in the PS2 game SaGa Frontier 2, still has more than enough differences for healing surges to remain as a distinct concept (that said, I actually think the SaGa system is far more elegant than 4E's HP and death systems).

As for the "Kewl Powers" thing... If that was inspired by certain videogames, then it was the best possible inspiration they could have taken. Of course, there are many videogames that don't give everyone powers like that, and I consider the 4E at-will/encounter/daily power divide to be its own totally unique monster. In fact, I think more videogames could stand to emulate the way 4E implements at-will powers.

 

[Zil]

For example? Do hp, leveling, wearing armor, having classes with customizable options also feel like they were lifted directly?

For example? Breaking everything down into powers that you can put on a power bar (or meld if we want to think in terns of card games analogy). Having magic tied more closely to level (i.e. low level people can't use magic from a higher tier). My 4E wizard's thundering power sure felt a lot like my WoW warrior's thundering blast even though the effect was a little different. In 4E (at least our games) you start to fall back on a routine of a using a certain set of powers repeatedly once you run out of daily/encounter powers. WoW has a similar thing. You have all these options, but really only a few of them are used all the time. Monsters have effective cool down periods in both games. WoW agro is simulated with the whole marking system. There's lots of similarity.

I'm not saying 4E is "WoW the table top role playing game." Rather, I'm saying it sure feels like they dipped into WoW for inspiration when they were building the game. And there isn't necessarily anything wrong with that - I am sure many people really like those influences.

I don't see why some people get all defensive over this particular question and pounce whenever someone posts that they find that 4E feels like WoW to them.

 

[Bumbles]

I don't see why some people get all defensive over this particular question and pounce whenever someone posts that they find that 4E feels like WoW to them.

Well, I think it's because of the numerous people who declare that 4E is the worst thing ever since it's like WOW. Yes, these people do exist, and they are annoying.

I was talking the other day with somebody about the free RPG Day and where to go to get stuff around here, and this other guy just declared he'd never go because there was two much 4E stuff on this list. Can't talk about anything gaming related without him finding some way to jump in with his 4E bashing.

Me, I try to recognize that not everybody is like that, but I can see how some people might feel a little defensive if they've run into the equivalent themselves. It's a tad unfair, perhaps, yet not unexpected.

 

[AllisterH]

FFT refers to Final Fantasy Tactics and it plays distinctly differently from regular Final Fantasy games.

(Even here, from FF XII go forward, it seems that Square-Enix is going to be real-time at least for the FF franchise. Kiss the "window-pane crash" goodbye)

 

[TwinBahamut]

FFT refers to Final Fantasy Tactics and it plays distinctly differently from regular Final Fantasy games.

(Even here, from FF XII go forward, it seems that Square-Enix is going to be real-time at least for the FF franchise. Kiss the "window-pane crash" goodbye)

You know, I have been a Final Fantasy fan since I was just a kid, but it took me quite a lot of pondering to even figure what you meant by "window-pane crash". Are you referring to the transition from the field screen to the battle screen when a random battle occurs? I've never heard that referred to as a "window-pane crash" before. Of course, my fondest memories are for the old SNES games, which is much more of a screen-pixelation/blur effect with that distinct sound...

At first, I thought you were talking about the pace of the battles themselves being real-time, especially with the comparison to the turn-based FFT. My initial reaction was "The series has used real-time battles since FF4. That isn't anything new...".

 

[AllisterH]

You know, I have been a Final Fantasy fan since I was just a kid, but it took me quite a lot of pondering to even figure what you meant by "window-pane crash". Are you referring to the transition from the field screen to the battle screen when a random battle occurs? I've never heard that referred to as a "window-pane crash" before. Of course, my fondest memories are for the old SNES games, which is much more of a screen-pixelation/blur effect with that distinct sound...

At first, I thought you were talking about the pace of the battles themselves being real-time, especially with the comparison to the turn-based FFT. My initial reaction was "The series has used real-time battles since FF4. That isn't anything new...".

Heh so many posters...

My reference to "window pane crash" was actually in reference to an earlier poster who said that 4e feels similar to Final Fantasy in that they feel a dsitinct difference when they transition from the on-screen exploration to the requisite random battle.

My point was that FFXIII and up, it seems like Square/Enix is not going to have the transition from exploration to fighting....

Games like Tactics and Disgaea I find play very differently than real time RPGs since positioning and movement plays a much larger role than the relatively static nature of RPGs where you basically have the monster facing one another and everyone simply starts wailing on each other...

 

[Doug McCrae]

The focus on magic item gear definitely has a feel of wow about it. But then again we were seeing this in the last few books of 3.5 and it's move towards "Armor Sets" and bonuses for having several themed magic items together.

Good point about the armor sets, they are videogame-y. However 4e has fewer magic items than previous editions and it's easier to houserule all magic items away than in any other edition.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

I find MMOs and computer game sin general feed back into D&D, and I learn a lot of ideas/realizations from them to put into D&D!

Playing real time, in a 3D environment you are immersed in, gives a hell of a lot of feedback and time pressure that a board and minis cannot.

I think D&D wised up and clarified things, by looking at computer games, learning things from them without getting priggish, accepting things, and working on them.
Only a twit wouldn't try to learn from what's been going on in the 30+ years since D&D's creation!
D&D is not holy writ, ya know, folks!! Much as I owe Gary Gygax and Dave Arnesen a huge debt...they were innovators, the first incarnation of anything is rarely ever perfect, as they haven't had time ot learn, to polish etc.

We went form Original, to AD&D, then to 2ned ed...then 3rd..then 4th. Earlier versions didn't have the internet and computer games to draw from, but they would have if they could have!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

In particular the rulebook reads like it was written by someone who just finished a class in object oriented programming.

Interesting observation. I once discussed with a friend of mine about a 3.x character and monster generator, and we talked about the way how to represent all this object-orientated.

I always wondered if "Effects" in 3E could kinda be the superclass of a lot of "things" in D&D - e.g. damage, objects and creatures could also be classified as "effects", arguing that spells cause effects, and spells can deal damage, conjure an object or a creature and so on. Never thought it through to the end, though. I think it wouldn't have worked so great, since the system didn't start out that way. But it's possible that 4E - with a different background for some designers (I think some indeed in software development, but I am not sure ATM) - built this in from the start.

 

[malraux]

Having magic tied more closely to level (i.e. low level people can't use magic from a higher tier). My 4E wizard's thundering power sure felt a lot like my WoW warrior's thundering blast even though the effect was a little different. In 4E (at least our games) you start to fall back on a routine of a using a certain set of powers repeatedly once you run out of daily/encounter powers.

Yeah, 5th level spells are sooo 4e only [/snark] Every edition of DnD has had magic tied very close to level. Just as every edition has had repetitive use of some spells (magic missile being an excellent goto spell through ~10th level for example).

I don't see why some people get all defensive over this particular question and pounce whenever someone posts that they find that 4E feels like WoW to them.

I tend to pounce because I find the arguments extremely weak in almost all cases. Or the statements are so ephemeral as to actually be meaningless.