Dungeons & Dragons is considered by many to be the forefather of the modern-day MMO. With the recent release of Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition, we are seeing evidence that new Dungeons and Dragons design is being informed by MMOs. In this article, Managing Editor Jon Wood discusses some of the specific elements of the new edition that draw in elements of our genre of video game.

There is little doubt that Dungeons and Dragons (and other early pen and paper games) helped to pave the way for the MMORPG genre. So much so that when co-creator Gary Gygax passed away, many MMORPGers mourned the loss.

It has always been easy to look at MMOs (and all RPGs, really) and find the influences that pen and paper game like Dungeons and Dragons (DnD) have had on them, but the most recent edition of the popular tabletop game turns all of that on its ear. It seems that the student had become the teacher, the circle of life is complete, and a number of other clichés that I could use to say that the recently released 4th edition of Dungeons and Dragons looks less like the template for MMORPGs and more like a product of them.

Whether Wizards of the Coast (the current developers of Dungeons and Dragons) designed this new edition of the game to be more appealing to the MMORPG gamer crowd or whether it is simply being informed by a popular game type difficult to say, but there are a number of parallels that should be explored:

Read the article here.

While I can agree that some MMORPG features add to the overall gameplay of PnP RPGs, it is said to see the most important part of a PnP RPG-- the actually Role-Playing -- fall to the side just like in MMORPGs today.

That is why I like the virtual game table.  You have all the tools you need to play a focused, story-driven campaign with a DM and players.  MMOs haven't been able to foster this environment so Wizards is being smart with their online offering.

The only thing that's learned is the generation gap in gaming.

D&D 3E opened up a whole ton of opprotunity and options for the D&D community to explore, and it explored it well. A great base system that was open to fan made creations to explore the possibilities of character. A detailed system for skills and cross classing that allowed people to develop the heroes they want to play -- both in story and in statistics.

4E, while I accept its existence and own the books, reminds me that the "new wave" of gamers come from a different background than we grew up with. We were the generation that lived off Nintendo and Text Based Games for the longest time, grew up with 2D sprites and slow dial up connections.

Even when we played the graphical games, to a degree we had to use our imaginations.

And we loved to tinker, loved to explore, love to mod.

Today, the kids have everything on demand, graphics that leave nothing to the imagination, and game systems that are more about balance and progression tracks than customization and exploration of development and styles.

Remember the games that had useless classes that were fun to role play? Now, everyone of equal level is capable and balanced with their tiered skill trees to be equally effective. The "Role" in Role Play is no longer the character, the story, and the involvement.....it's merely your position on the team. Who cares if you're the dragon-blooded prince of a fallen kingdom; do you know how to tank and hold aggro? That scholarly man over there, who's traveled the world and seen so many things and read so many lores-- they don't care about that, they need to know if he can stay back and heal or if he's spec'd for DoT/DPS.

This isn't a total bash on 4E....it's me feeling old all of a sudden.

Except there isn't an online offering.  And by making the game more MMO friendly its dumbed down for WoW kiddies.

One thing a lot of people are forgetting as they rush to make snarky criticisms of the new edition -- these are  just the core rulebooks.

These books are meant only as a foundation, the bare basics you need in order to be able to play the game.  If you tried to play D&D using ONLY the core rulebooks of any previous edition, you might be surprised at how shallow the game would feel.

Yes, there's no question that some things have been left out of the 4E core rulebooks that were considered "basic" in previous editions, but I would argue that maybe the previous editions tried to cover a bit too much in their PH and DMG.  I can think of a lot of things in there that are NOT needed and that my groups never used.

In particular, a lot of the complaints about role-playing and flavor seem silly to me.  These things are best covered by house rules anyway.  If you absolutely cannot wait for a supplement to cover the rules you need, just use the old rules you already know and love.  Why is that so hard?

If your group is inclined to roleplay, then roleplay is going to happen.  If your players are the kind who like to create elaborate character histories, then that is what they are going to do.  No amount of text included in (or left out of) a rulebook can change any of that.

9 out of 10 MMO gamers probably haven't played and never will play PnP. Gearing PnP rules toward MMO guidelines is stupid. Make a separate ruleset for that stuff.

Originally posted by Hexxeity

One thing a lot of people are forgetting as they rush to make snarky criticisms of the new edition -- these are  just the core rulebooks.

These books are meant only as a foundation, the bare basics you need in order to be able to play the game.  If you tried to play D&D using ONLY the core rulebooks of any previous edition, you might be surprised at how shallow the game would feel.

Yes, there's no question that some things have been left out of the 4E core rulebooks that were considered "basic" in previous editions, but I would argue that maybe the previous editions tried to cover a bit too much in their PH and DMG.  I can think of a lot of things in there that are NOT needed and that my groups never used.

In particular, a lot of the complaints about role-playing and flavor seem silly to me.  These things are best covered by house rules anyway.  If you absolutely cannot wait for a supplement to cover the rules you need, just use the old rules you already know and love.  Why is that so hard?

If your group is inclined to roleplay, then roleplay is going to happen.  If your players are the kind who like to create elaborate character histories, then that is what they are going to do.  No amount of text included in (or left out of) a rulebook can change any of that.

I should start this response by saying that I'm really personally enjoying the new rules.

That being said, I think that what you said about roleplaying is valid, but I have a number of members of my group who have voiced this concern to me. It's as though a lack of rules in the core rulebooks invalidates the form of nuanced character that they are able to build without resorting to house rules.

The great thing about DnD is that house rules can fix just about any gripe people may have with the game. The point though, is that there seems to be a trend toward steamlining the fine details away (in terms of the core rulebooks).

I also want to say that from a personal perspective, as far as rules of that nature go, I'm not likley to pay them nearly as much heed if they're in a later-released supplement. I don't want to have to go back after new rules are made and suddenly have my character know things (statistically speaking) that he didn't know before.

It's all personal preference in the ned and all this article really analyzes is the rules as they are presented in the PHB.

Originally posted by Hexxeity

One thing a lot of people are forgetting as they rush to make snarky criticisms of the new edition -- these are  just the core rulebooks.

These books are meant only as a foundation, the bare basics you need in order to be able to play the game.  If you tried to play D&D using ONLY the core rulebooks of any previous edition, you might be surprised at how shallow the game would feel.

Yes, there's no question that some things have been left out of the 4E core rulebooks that were considered "basic" in previous editions, but I would argue that maybe the previous editions tried to cover a bit too much in their PH and DMG.  I can think of a lot of things in there that are NOT needed and that my groups never used.

In particular, a lot of the complaints about role-playing and flavor seem silly to me.  These things are best covered by house rules anyway.  If you absolutely cannot wait for a supplement to cover the rules you need, just use the old rules you already know and love.  Why is that so hard?

If your group is inclined to roleplay, then roleplay is going to happen.  If your players are the kind who like to create elaborate character histories, then that is what they are going to do.  No amount of text included in (or left out of) a rulebook can change any of that.

QFT.   I think there is just the right amount of roleplaying information that should have been added to the manuals.  I chuckle everything I read people freaking out because they excepted the book to spend chapter after chapter telling you how to use your imagination.    Not rocket science here you know.  Personally I like the 4E rules and have enjoyed reading over them since I picked up on release day.  

And to those that cry about the game being geared too much towards minutures or using the D&D Insider deal, get a life, these are just tools to make your life easier.  And if you don't want to buy the official minitures use coins or whatever.   After all the game is about imagination right?

Are there MMO elements with D&D 4e that were not there in prior editions including the 3.5 reboot?  Sure.  Is this a bad thing if the product will start appealing to a wider audience?   I

Darn kids, get off of my 2nd ed. DnD books!

Teenagers these days, no respect for old-school roleplaying! Why, I remember the Time of Troubles...

Originally posted by Stradden

 

 

 

The great thing about DnD is that house rules can fix just about any gripe people may have with the game. The point though, is that there seems to be a trend toward steamlining the fine details away (in terms of the core rulebooks).

 

 

 

People need to tattoo this statement (which another player also made mention of).

You don't have to take any rule as gold. You can change anything you want. You can add anything you want.

I believe Gary Gygax stated that the rules were just guidelines.

Heck, in my campaings, I only had players role for battles and saving throws. Everything else was much like  a book they were playing in. With a bit of danger to make them feel that they might fail.

Because otherwise it comes down to being a bean counter. No drama, no anything other than charts and tables.

Originally posted by AlienShirt

While I can agree that some MMORPG features add to the overall gameplay of PnP RPGs, it is said to see the most important part of a PnP RPG-- the actually Role-Playing -- fall to the side just like in MMORPGs today.

Roleplaying doesn't rely on game mechanics!  Roleplaying only falls by the way side when you let it.

Originally posted by TookyG

Originally posted by AlienShirt

While I can agree that some MMORPG features add to the overall gameplay of PnP RPGs, it is said to see the most important part of a PnP RPG-- the actually Role-Playing -- fall to the side just like in MMORPGs today.

Roleplaying doesn't rely on game mechanics!  Roleplaying only falls by the way side when you let it.

Exactly TookyG. People seem to be upset that they can't spend skill points on Rope Use and Pottery anymore, as if anyone who ever understood the mechanics would ever waste points on that crap. Seems to be a duplicitous arguement going on here. A bunch of people upset that "WotC is catering to a no imagination no roleplay MMO demographic" by removing a bunch of crap no one used and isn't needed if you have imagination and can roleplay.

It's an If you want to be a tailor or a side show freak or something, tell your DM. I'm sure you guys can figure something out on your own, you shouldn't need books and rules unless you have no imagination.

Originally posted by Quethel

Originally posted by TookyG

Originally posted by AlienShirt

While I can agree that some MMORPG features add to the overall gameplay of PnP RPGs, it is said to see the most important part of a PnP RPG-- the actually Role-Playing -- fall to the side just like in MMORPGs today.

Roleplaying doesn't rely on game mechanics!  Roleplaying only falls by the way side when you let it.

 

Exactly TookyG. People seem to be upset that they can't spend skill points on Rope Use and Pottery anymore, as if anyone who ever understood the mechanics would ever waste points on that crap. Seems to be a duplicitous arguement going on here. A bunch of people upset that "WotC is catering to a no imagination no roleplay MMO demographic" by removing a bunch of crap no one used and isn't needed if you have imagination and can roleplay.

It's an If you want to be a tailor or a side show freak or something, tell your DM. I'm sure you guys can figure something out on your own, you shouldn't need books and rules unless you have no imagination.

I disagree with the "as if anyone who ever understood the mechanics would ever waste points on that crap".

I know that I and my own group understood the mechanics quite well. There was something awesome about taking points and putting them into a character building skill. I liked being able to make a conscious decision to not go with an obvious statistical advantage and instead opt for something different.

I would also like to point out that I think you're right about the DM being able to work something out, but as I've said before, it's a lack of support for that particular play style. The same thing has happened in MMOs. I think that it is easy for developers to say that players will use their own imaginations for character building stuff and role-play elements. I think that probably has a lot to do with the reason that we so seldom see MMO mechanics that concentrate on who you are as an individual.

If we want to see a real departure from the guided experince, do the same as everyone esle, be the same as everyone else, but be in a world WITH everyone else, mechanics that would make characters feel more individual would be more than welcome.

Just sayin...

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Quethel

Originally posted by TookyG

Originally posted by AlienShirt

While I can agree that some MMORPG features add to the overall gameplay of PnP RPGs, it is said to see the most important part of a PnP RPG-- the actually Role-Playing -- fall to the side just like in MMORPGs today.

Roleplaying doesn't rely on game mechanics!  Roleplaying only falls by the way side when you let it.

 

Exactly TookyG. People seem to be upset that they can't spend skill points on Rope Use and Pottery anymore, as if anyone who ever understood the mechanics would ever waste points on that crap. Seems to be a duplicitous arguement going on here. A bunch of people upset that "WotC is catering to a no imagination no roleplay MMO demographic" by removing a bunch of crap no one used and isn't needed if you have imagination and can roleplay.

It's an If you want to be a tailor or a side show freak or something, tell your DM. I'm sure you guys can figure something out on your own, you shouldn't need books and rules unless you have no imagination.

 

I disagree with the "as if anyone who ever understood the mechanics would ever waste points on that crap".

I know that I and my own group understood the mechanics quite well. There was something awesome about taking points and putting them into a character building skill. I liked being able to make a conscious decision to not go with an obvious statistical advantage and instead opt for something different.

I would also like to point out that I think you're right about the DM being able to work something out, but as I've said before, it's a lack of support for that particular play style. The same thing has happened in MMOs. I think that it is easy for developers to say that players will use their own imaginations for character building stuff and role-play elements. I think that probably has a lot to do with the reason that we so seldom see MMO mechanics that concentrate on who you are as an individual.

If we want to see a real departure from the guided experince, do the same as everyone esle, be the same as everyone else, but be in a world WITH everyone else, mechanics that would make characters feel more individual would be more than welcome.

Just sayin...

nah, I can't really buy that.

any system that has taken into account such mundane things such as rope making or fishing (pen and paper I'm speaking about) has gone too far and has taken itself WAY too seriously.

Online games probably don't have it because they would have to create systems to incorporate it, quests that incorporate it, animations, code, etc.

Heck, even the climbing in AoC seems to be a bit forced. Or it's like the ability to create items in Neverwinter Nights but the reality is you really didn't need to have it as it just feels extra.

Quite frankly, as a former dungeon master I would just give players the ability to make rope or be able to fish. If it got out of hand I might say "choose x skills from a list that you can be proficient at and we'll start".

Because quite frankly that's the bean counter type of playing that I'm talking about. The willingness to quantify every little thing so that the session becomes less about adventure and more about rolling dice and making sure that points are assigned.

It starts to become adventure gaming for actuarials. It's dry and it bogs down gaming.

edit: having said that I've read the article about the 4th edtion rules and I wouldn't purchase them. Seems too forced. I would say that players should just use former rulesets and disregard these rules if you feel the same.

Dungeons and Dragons should not try to be more like video games, video games should try to be more like Dungeons and Dragons.

Originally posted by stine96

Except there isn't an online offering.  And by making the game more MMO friendly its dumbed down for WoW kiddies.

exactly this is why I Hate WoW mostly,  and its really not that i hate WoW but i hate what WOW has done to the MMO genre and RPG genre as a whole.

just when it seemed like MMOs were starting to evolve into living breathing worlds without class restrictions and what not. WoW came along and destroyed that whole concept (maybe not destroyed but definately pushed that concept back quite a number of years).

and now this with the godfather of RPGs deevolving aka streamlining themselves so that any WoW kiddy can understand.

its just sad what WOW has done to the industry

...so, if I understand this correctly, they're ADDING the need for the holy trinity to D&D? Tank, healer, CC/DPS... That's the one part I always hated about MMORPGs, you always needed a specific group setup. D&D you could really pull off any sort of group setup without need for specific classes (though some form of healing obviously helped quite a bit in making stuff easier).

This should never happen in a pen and paper RPG: "Ooh, I wanna play a rogue" "actually, we need a tank, you're rolling fighter" "...screw that *leaves*" "ok guys guess we can't play tonight, we don't have the right group setup"

Originally posted by AgentHoze

...so, if I understand this correctly, they're ADDING the need for the holy trinity to D&D? Tank, healer, CC/DPS... That's the one part I always hated about MMORPGs, you always needed a specific group setup. D&D you could really pull off any sort of group setup without need for specific classes (though some form of healing obviously helped quite a bit in making stuff easier).

This should never happen in a pen and paper RPG: "Ooh, I wanna play a rogue" "actually, we need a tank, you're rolling fighter" "...screw that *leaves*" "ok guys guess we can't play tonight, we don't have the right group setup"

I am very wary of this myself.

That being said, however, a scenario like hat would only happen if the players let it. 

Also, it's been going on for fae longer than MMOs.  I played 1st edition (blue box) games in the early 80's where people thought one guy should play a cleric because we might need healing.   Yes, I'm old.

I agree with the poster who said MMORPGs should be trying to be like DnD instead of the other way around. DnD allowed for more options, character customization, and yes, it even provided tools for RP,so that you didn't have to create them yourself. I mean, if someone has already went through the trouble of creating a great way to involve RP into the mechanics, why reinvent the wheel?

The older MMORPGs never really centered content around Tank, Healer, DPS, CC. You could invite the first 8 people into a group and do fine if you play smart. In fact, it is more fun to play with an unoptimized group. Having a Tank, Healer, DPS, and CC is just something optimizers found out to be the easiest/best way to beat content.

I have the 3.5E rulebook sitting right here. The author of this article stated that there wasn't any defined roles. Well, I'm reading right here in the "Role" section under each class, and it outlines the role for that particular class. Now, it didn't take into account the effect multi-classing had on that classes role, but the statistics alone required you to choose a class that complimented the other.

The only thing this new ruleset is doing, from what I hear, is forcing you to have one of each role in your group, which wasn't required before. In my opinion, this is a bad move and it displeases me to hear they are doing that. We need more freedom, not less. If there is anything MMORPGs have tought us, it is that lack of freedom in character customization makes things super boring.