I guess I rarely post here, at least lately, about non-personal things, but I have had Dungeons & Dragons on my mind for the past week or two, and I feel like I should post something, somewhere, that expresses my thoughts.
Specifically, I've been thinking about the fairly new and still unfinished 4th Edition of the popular tabletop game. A LOT of veteran players seem to hate the new edition, and they have various reasons for this. I personally find most of their reasons to be trivial. I mostly find that they're simply resisting change, a common trait of all humans. (Oddly enough, D&D does NOT express this! Humanity, though easily adaptable to any situation, is actually a race that dislikes change, and often resists it. I wonder what D&D players, and WotC especially, would think about that fact.)
Now, I could try and go on to express why I think everybody is complaining for nothing, arguing against each specific reason, but I'm lazy. And I'm also absent-minded, and tend to ramble in my rants. I am likely to forget details here and there.
So for now, the sum of all complaints about 4e is the following: "Boohoo, I can't have godly power anymore!"
If you want godly power, go play WoW. Blizzard's philosophy is "you can never have too much power."
If you want a challenging roleplaying game, stick to D&D. WotC DOES believe in too much power.
The only complaint *I* have about 4e, is that I don't see any real benefit in wielding an off-hand weapon. The only time I can see this being beneficial is if you have a power that allows you to make attacks with both weapons, and I think that mostly limits this benefit to rogues and rangers. Maybe just rangers. Otherwise, it seems a bit useless, since you can only use a basic attack each round with one weapon or the other. What happens to races like the Thri-keen, which is a race of mantis-like humanoids sporting four arms? They can wield four one-handed weapons, two two-handed weapons, or two double weapons. Do they get extra attacks?
This isn't so much a "Oh no, now I can't get more powerful by wielding two weapons" as a "Why should I customize my character to be wielding two weapons?"
Fortunately, the Tempest Fighter build was offered in Martial Power, so now Fighters can choose to dual-wield, but I am still confused about this. There are some small benefits, from feats and a few class features, but they are small. Whatever happened to extra attacks? Why *can't* we attack with both?
I can get why they removed attacking multiple times in one round because of having a high attack bonus. That makes sense. But not attacking with both weapons while dual-wielding? What ARE you doing with your second weapon in those six seconds, while you're attacking?
Here's an example to emphasize my point: Take one of your kitchen knives. Maybe a butter knife for safety. Make extra careful not to cut yourself, anybody near you, or any objects nearby. I know a friend who happens to own a machete. Maybe you can just grab that and go outside for a few moments to exercise this. Slash this blade through the air. Just once. Now think about how long it took you to perform that simple maneuver. That was a basic melee attack of D&D. It took you, what, 2 seconds tops? Sounds about right. There's your standard action. Now you could take your move action, which is usually about 30 feet per round, for a human. Making a quick 30 foot movement in a single round would possibly take 2-3 seconds. Especially in a battle, since you're probably not just walking, but dashing quickly about. I think it's about twice the width of my bedroom, and that takes 1, maybe 1.5 seconds to cross. So that basic melee attack, plus moving 30 feet, took me 4 seconds or so. So there's your move action. I have 2 more seconds to my "round." I suppose that would largely be reserved for minor actions, but think on this: I have a second blade in my other hand. You think maybe I should attack with it?
I will admit that the concept of a six-second round is a bit of an abstraction. Real combat doesn't take place with six-second turns, obviously, but the D&D rules are attempting to put these battles into pencil and paper form. Six seconds is about the amount of time it takes for one "moment" of battle in D&D.
Those of you who have read about Drizzt Do'Urden: how many times in the books did he slash his opponent with both weapons? I suppose you could express some of those moves as Martial Powers, but it happened far too often to not have also counted as a double melee basic attack. Drizzt is obviously a Two-Blade Ranger, (among other things, but primarily this) in D&D 4E...but he only can attack with one scimitar every six seconds, besides his melee attack powers? Drizzt could hit you six times in six seconds as a standard move, simply because of how dexterous and fast he is. That wouldn't be an at-will power for Drizzt, that would be part of his melee basic attack! It stands to reason that somebody of average dexterity, like me, could at least get in two hits in six seconds. Artemis Entreri was on par with Drizzt, and though he was also amazingly dexterous, he was also human. So it's not beyond the realm of possibilities.
This isn't something that turns me off from 4e. This is just one aspect of the new edition that grates on me, and seems to make no logical sense, not from a roleplaying perspective OR a mechanics perspective.
That rant aside, I want to touch on my biggest pet peeve that has evolved ever since I first heard it expressed: the complaint that 4e D&D is a lot like World of Warcraft.
It is nothing like WoW! Not in the slightest!
Where did ANYBODY make that connection? Point me towards a SINGLE mechanic of WoW that has a perfect clone copy in D&D, I dare you.
Yes, 4e gets rid of Vancian spell-casting. I understand why so many D&D players are attached to that system, since it has been around from the beginning of the game. I can understand that some of you even preferred Vancian spell-casting to the new 4e system of powers. But that doesn't mean we adopted a WoW system of spells and abilities!
WoW uses mana and cooldowns numbering in the mere seconds.
4e D&D uses At-Will Attack Powers, Encounter Attack Powers, and Daily Attack Powers. For every class, including fighters and rogues, not just wizards and warlocks. This allows Fighters to do more each round than, "I swing my axe. I swing my axe again. I swing my axe again, but this time I move 5 feet to the left. I swing my axe again."
Now, Fighters can use powers of Martial prowess. They don't just swing their axe, they use a trained combat maneuver with their axe, designed to unbalance the enemy and push them a few feet away by knocking them off-balance. I just described the Fighter At-Will Power Tide of Iron. I didn't even know the power, I made up the description first then looked for one that matched it.
WoW does none of this. Nothing even like it. In fact, most abilities in WoW don't include knockback effects. WoW also deals with a list of something called threat, to decide who AI monsters attack. None of this "marking" stuff that D&D fighters get to use. (Honestly, I think this method is better than threat, but WoW needs threat to code their AI effectively).
All of your abilities in WoW are pretty much At-Will powers, and you can use far more than one ability in a six-second round. Some have longer cooldowns than the six seconds that is a D&D round, yes. Some of them might be able to have the label of an encounter power, but that's a rarity, like a Shaman's Elemental totems, (and those Elementals suck anyways, nobody uses them seriously). But D&D 4e is not a cleverly-disguised WoW, like all the conspiracy-theorists want you to believe. Powers in D&D are not fueled by Mana, Energy, Rage, or Runes. There is no fueling system present in D&D mechanics. It's just how often you can use that power. Once per round, once per encounter, or once per day. In fact, this is the precise reason Vancian spell-casting was originally used in D&D! Whoever originally started up D&D, Gygax and the other guy involved, didn't want to use the unoriginal concept of mana. Instead we got Vancian spell-casting. The new 4e system of using Powers is simply an alternate method of not relying on Mana for spell-casters, or Rage for Warrior types, or Energy for Rogue types. At the same time, the new system admits, "You know what? It's STUPID that wizards forget their spells!"
WoW also has nothing similar to even the simplified 4e skill system. WoW has skills, yes, but they're either professions or weapon skills. If you recall, Profession is a 3e skill, which does not seem to be present in 4e anymore. I haven't read enough about the new edition to figure out where it went, because I can assure you item creation is still existent. I just have to find it.
To clarify: Weapon skill in WoW affects how well and how hard you can hit with the weapons you're wielding. So that makes it quite similar to a combination of attack bonus, weapon proficiency, weapon focus, weapon specialization, and other such things.
In WoW, your armor, and your various other defenses, are also worked differently. Armor can be expressed in the thousands, reducing damage by a percentage, rather than being a "how hard it is to hit me" mechanic. Dodge works more like D&D AC than Armor does, and even then, that's a percentage chance to avoid melee attacks. Magic resistance is a separate stat that is a percentage chance to completely resist the effects of a spell. I think. I was never too sure on magic resistance in WoW, and I think it's actually mostly level-based. Surviving spells in WoW is more about interrupting spells, or simply absorbing them by having thousands of HP.
D&D actually simplifies AC so that it works for both spells AND melee attacks. There are also Fortitude, Reflex, and Will defenses, usually reserved for power effects rather than damage. All of these defenses represent a number that your die roll (plus any bonuses you get from a number of places) must beat, in order to land your attack (whatever the result of that attack would be). You don't reduce the damage of an attack by the number of your AC. Armor doesn't work that way in D&D. It only provides avoidance, as opposed to damage reduction.
D&D has to provide fancy rules for moving in combat, too. You get move actions, and standard actions, and minor actions, and it all works together in a manner that makes logical sense. In WoW, most of the time you don't ever think about that. If you're using a spell with a casting time, such as Lightning Bolt, then you can't move or the spell is interrupted, and you have to cast again. A lot of abilities are also instantaneous, or you have one ability that makes others into an instantaneous ability. Movement in WoW is more chaotic and more random, while D&D puts movement more into tactics and strategy. A lot of combat in WoW is more about timing when you hit your abilitiy's hotkey, than about any strategy or tactics. In fact, a lot of the time, I use my abiltiies in conjunction with rapid mouse movement, so that I use an ability in mid-air, facing backwards. You can't do that in D&D! Well, maybe you could with an appropriate Acrobatics check. But the point is, WoW doesn't have any skill check involved with this, and it's entirely related to the actual player's ability to dexterously manipulate a computer mouse.
I can't think, right now, what else I could possibly cover to try and argue that D&D 4e is nothing like WoW. I'm spent. My rant is over.
If you play D&D, or at least dabble into it, feel free to comment. Feel free to argue or agree. Either way, my opinion is expressed: Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition is absolutely nothing like World of Warcraft.
Seeing people honestly believing that it IS like WoW...really ticks me off.
I shall finish by saying the following: if anybody around in San Antonio, those few of you who happen to read my blog posts, would like to play D&D, either 3.5 OR the new 4e, I am totally game. I already have something set up for Sundays, but I am open to ideas.
I can say that I find myself attracted to 4th Edition, and the more I read about it, the more I want to play a 4e campaign as a Genasi Swordmage. It's rules seem so much more balanced, even if all the customization options are yet to be released. Who knows, maybe I will even dabble into DMing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

8 comments:
Hi Drake!
Yeah, D&D and WoW have quite little in common. But people continue to make the comparison as a way to diss 4e for making the game more accessible to new players and streamlining a lot of things that, frankly, needed to be streamlined in interest of a more fun game.
It's pretty much what I said right in the beginning: People are just resistant to change. Streamlining the rules can only lead to good things.
One thing I left out from my post is that people are often saying that roleplaying in 4e is discouraged, rather than specifically harping on the rules. They may say something similar to "If you want to roleplay, why are you playing 4th?"
The only response I have to that is: since when did roleplaying rely on rules so much? If anything, 4e has made it easier to roleplay, because you no longer are bogged down with as many rules. While they may point to "builds" as something discouraging creativity, the powers system has made it easier to change the flavor of your character, just by altering the names of your powers and the flavor text. I could turn an archery ranger into a time-traveling gunner, if I so chose.
I especially love what they did with familiars. Instead of just automatically handing them to wizards and sorcerers, any Arcane class can get the feat for a familiar. Even a Swordmage or a Bard could have one! This allows for so many more character options, especially if more Arcane classes are released.
Relying on game rules to aid in your roleplaying is just as ridiculous as relying on WoW graphics to aid in your roleplaying. It restricts you more than aids you.
I'm not a big fan of 4e(as Drake is well aware), and I do think there are some similarities between it and MMOs, but they're exaggerated somewhat by the detractors. In a chat room I hang out on, we had one person in particular that I'd often have to /defend/ 4e from... until I finally changed rooms because I found her far too obnoxious.
In any case, I agree that something needs to be done with dual wielding. It's one of the many unfinished details in 4e that really needs addressed. I suppose that's one of my complaints... it just doesn't feel quite ready yet. In particular I'd like more noncombat powers available, although there are a number already that can be used by a canny player.
I'd disagree that streamlining can only lead to good things... but frankly, the 3.5 rules are/were a convoluted mess, so uh... I can't really argue it in this case. For the most part(barring some very specific cases like the charge rules), I'm quite pleased with the 4e system. Even the six second turn doesn't bother me at all. Back in 1st/2nd edition, each combat round was a full minute long. It's assumed that most of the round is made up of jockeying for position, shuffling footwork, dodging and looking for an opening, etc. The idea behind a higher BaB allowing more attacks is that a more experienced combatant could find more ways to take advantage and strike.
Honestly, I can't say I'm going to miss that whole number of attacks thing. Against an even opponent, most of the reduced-hit attacks were pretty useless, and against lesser opponents the various Powers deal with the difference in level much more nicely. I'm not such a huge fan of everyone having the same base attack progression, but that's one aspect of the system that I really haven't had a chance to get a feel for, myself, so I'm still withholding judgement.
And finally, I agree about the roleplaying thing. I do think that the emphasis on 'builds' and such in the base book is a mistake. Having archetypes is fine, but it should mention other alternatives more, and encourage more customization and creativity. Maybe it's me having a knee-jerk reaction to the word 'build' though... I hated it when it was used in 3.X, too. But really, 4e provides plenty of support for roleplaying in the form of skill challenges and such. I /would/ like to see the return of Craft and Profession skills and the like, somehow. The only reason this isn't a big complaint is that there are, frankly, a lot of problems with how they were done in 3.5, and I don't have a better solution.
I'm glad you enjoy the game, and I'll probably be running a 4e game myself soon(my local players prefer 4e), but I think I'm just embittered by the broken promises and potential(DnD Insider anyone), and the annoyance of one player in my 3.5 game that Will. Not. Shut. Up. about how 4e does such and such better, even though I tried that campaign in 4th and it didn't work nearly as well. They are, I think, best considered as targeting different demographics. When a company changes focus like that, there's really no pleasing the entire base... and in this case that includes me. I don't like some of the changes they've made, but in almost all cases I can see why they did so.
A note on two weapon fighting: if D&D rules were made by people who have an understanding on how any form of martial arts / weaponry works, they would understand that by using both sides of your body, your effectiveness is increased two-fold. If I could only use my left hand, surely I would be... what's the word... screwed. I don't know if that is the point you were trying to make, but that is something that I think should be noted. The problem with the European weapon systems is that they are not versatile as far as using both hands goes. Even with the quarterstaff, the concept of changing your grips is not used.
I can readily agree that this is the underlying reason so many people complain about 4e: the system isn't complete. It's still not fully released, because of WotC's business model, with how many supplements they want to sell. In recognizing that the system is incomplete, I look at what rules I can, and hold back criticisms with the thought that, hopefully, the parts I feel aren't right are simply incomplete, or not in their final version. Dual-wielding is one of those, and I'm sorely hoping they will make the choice of sword-and-board/dual-wield/2hander/ranged weapon more flexible for any of the classes that wield weapons. I would still love to see Swordmages be flexible enough to do dual-wielding, though I can understand the concept that one hand is used for casting magic (somatic component, I would call it). All they need to do is make it so that these classes get *different* bonuses for wielding different weapons, rather than only losing bonuses. A Tempest Fighter is a very attractive build for many people playing fighter, but by limiting the Tempest Technique bonuses to only weapons with the Offhand property, you remove many character concepts. In making my dwarf fighter, dual-wielding waraxes (a concept that is not exactly unheard of nor a bad combat style, for a dwarf), I lose the biggest bonuses of Tempest Technique, and gain nothing in return (except for the possibility of a higher die roll).
In response to floating-bells: I readily agree with this. I have dabbled into Tae Kwon Do and Aikido, and also a little Karate. I still have not made up my mind if I even want to seriously take on a martial arts or not, let alone which one to pick, but I have studied enough of them that it is indeed part of my complaints with the weapon system. It can all come down to the single basic kung-fu punch that most martial arts use as the basic punch. I step forward in my stance, punch my hand forward at about solar plexus level...and sure, that's one basic attack. They have the concept of a "basic attack" down pretty well in 4e, I think. Any martial style, weapon or no, has a basic attack. But you can make a second attack pretty quickly, by continuing the motion with the other hand. You can even choose to shift your stance further forward rather than standing in place, forcing your opponent to move back or hold his ground against your punch (that there would be the basic 5-foot shift, except that your opponent often is forced to shift with you if you shift into him). It's from the concept of such a basic attack that almost every complicated maneuver in any martial arts is actually derived, including even the basic block. The basic block is designed to block the basic attack. Further blocks are added to block different strikes.
In any fighting style, the best warrior is the one who has his whole body in balance, working in coordination. So while you are using a basic attack with one hand, what are you doing with the other? What are you doing with your feet? How are you positioning your body? How are you tensing your muscles, preparing for your next motion? When I picture the current 4e concept of the basic melee attack, I picture the off-hand dangling uselessly at my side. I am open to so many attacks doing this!
At the very least, I would like to be able to follow-up my one-handed sword slash with an off-hand punch, or choose to dual-wield the normally one-handed weapon to put more weight behind my attack.
Even with a basic longsword, in European fighting, if the fighter loses his shield, or simply doesn't have one, he will often grip it in *both* hands, in order to put more weight and coordination behind each strike.
Also, as to the following statement: "I do think there are some similarities between it and MMOs, but they're exaggerated somewhat by the detractors."
The thing is, I'm not saying that D&D does not have similarities to MMOs. ALL roleplaying games have similarities to each other; it isn't something you can escape.
What I have been trying to argue is that 4e does not feel any more like an MMO than 3e did. People are just saying that because they don't like where the new powers system has taken the game.
Hence why I compared on as many mechanics as I could think to compare, piece by piece, rather than looking at the abstract ideas behind them.
hey dude, if you do not have a game going on Saturdays and you have the time slot open I have a group starting up shortly. It only consists of a few people atm and I like smaller groups, no more than 5 players and a DM etc. We're doing high fantasy 3.5, if you are interested let me know. I live in the Medical Center of San Antonio and my email is Lord_brightstar@yahoo.com
Post a Comment