I must say I am impressed from what I am seeing and from what I have read thus far I find it far more appealing than the 3.0 or the 3.5 incantations of DnD's game engine. I like how it seems they finally realized that making complex rules for a game engine that obviously could not handle it would no longer work unless they created a completely different game engine . Instead of creating a new engine to run a complex game (which would alienate the entire DnD populace and reduce the number of incoming gamers due to its complexity and far removal from the previous game engine) they gutted the entire rule system surrounding their game and created a whole different rule set which I find refreshing. I also think this change finally puts DnD in its proper place as a high powered heroic fantasy game and not a half ass simulator with super powers. Honestly any one talking about an intellectual challenge or true customization shouldn’t have ever been being playing DnD instead you should have headed to GURPS for that level of play.
AD&D inspired the cookie cutter MMOs like WoW. Now AD&D "learns" from those...
It's a shame so many people think pen&paper RPGs = AD&D, because that means: - the good p&p RPGs are only played by a few privileged ones, - MMOs get inspired by AD&D too much, and we see no diversity on top of silly inherited game mechanics.
I didn't read the thread, so I don't know if anyone said it, but... Gygax is turning in his grave. They're destroying his franchise a couple of months after his death. Carrion feeders, or what?
trust me, if he hated the new rules then he would have said something about it, he would have refused to do PR for it (he did quite a bit)
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds -Solid non level based game -Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
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.
I've DM'ed 2nd and 3rd/3.5 ed.
In my latest campaign, based on 3.5 rules, I introduced what I called "world skills," which were basically a set of additional skills that people could take and put points into on top of the usual DnD skills. These included things like fishing, gardening, drink mixing, ladder crafting, and so on. My players absolutely loved it, because it allowed them to make things they would usually just be able to RP, and turn them into actual game mechanics with real uses. For example the guy who could mix drinks could make dangerous potions that could be used as flask weapons. The guy who could fish could buy tackle and bait, then go to the deep seas and fish for treasure. So mundane skills DO have a use, but it depends on how creative your players are. Fortunately I play with a very experienced group, where everyone has over 20 years of DnD experience.
After reading through the 4th ed core books, I've come to the conclusion that in order to play it I'd have to seriously gut the rules. 3/3.5 needed some editing on my part to make it playable for my campaigns, 4 will need a lot. That said, 4's combat is somewhat streamlined on some fronts, which is nice, but a lot of things are missing or simply wrong. It does not, in my opinion, promote tactical and difficult combat. I want my players to fear death, to know that the things they fight could kill them, and that in order to win they must be on top of their game.
I didn't read the thread, so I don't know if anyone said it, but... Gygax is turning in his grave. They're destroying his franchise a couple of months after his death. Carrion feeders, or what?
Well I would not go as far as saying that Gygax is turning over in his grave. I can say this though. I have talked with him on various messages boards and I can say for a 100% fact that he DID NOT like the 3/3.5 edition of D&D. One of the main reasons is because it made D&D too complex.
Hence the reason for him designing his own game(Lejendary Adventures) which is rules lite. While he maybe might not have liked some of the changes of 4e D&D. I am sure that he would have liked the fact that Wizards of the Coast at least made the game more accessable and easier to play.
I myself will always be partial to 1E AD&D(I did like 2E but not as much) but still I am optimistic about the 4E and will be getting it. It sounds pretty interesting and if it truly is easier to play then that is great. My wife has really taken an interest in D&D and maybe the 4E will be the way to go for her.
I also really like how they are doing the online aspect of D&D. The idea of a virtual gaming table is just brilliant. It gives all us pen and paper rpg fans a way to play with friends easier.
As 1st Edition Player, I can tell you that many skills were made up on the spot by DM-Player interaction.
PLAYER: "I'm going to tie my rope to my axe, try to throw it through the castle window, hope it catches on something, then swing over to the castle wall and climb through the window."
The DM at this point, might role some dice and actually use the results...
STRENGTH roll - top see if the character can throw that far, DEXTERITY ROLL- to see if they can aim that well, LUCK roll etc.
... or if she thought it was a good plan and it advanced the story, she might just agree to let it happen.
That is something that 3/3.5/and now 4th edition rules have supplanted. There was no rope skill or jump skill or throwing skill. The DM and the player worked it out because the most important thing was the story, not the rule book.
I'm not saying that the new way is bad, but it is a definite shift. And in most editions I think that there is a section about how the DMs should run their campaigns the way they want, regardless of the rules.
Will we ever see this type of playing in an MMO? I can only hope, but probably not soon.
_____________________________ "Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit"
but not this time. Being a DnD player since that time whem mmo was just Ultima, this articles sounds at least wrong.
When you talk about character roles, please quote a game where I choose "Leader" as a role? It's not a new concept to form groups where each player has his role. It's not something that MMO is teaching, this concept exist since the first DnD version (waaaaay before mmo games), but they decide to call it classes instead of roles.
MMOs have been using terms like these to describe the roles of the classes for quite some time. Rounding out a solid MMO group is almost always reliant on having characters that can fill each of these roles. While the same has been true of Dungeons and Dragons in the past in a passive way, 4th Edition marks the first time that the game’s design has incorporated it and spelled it out in terms that are so familiar to online RPG players.
Well, since the beginning of DnD it was a wise choice to make a group with different classes... or imagine 5 people around a table playing a Cleric...
about the combat powers, news for you... they also existed all this time... in the 3rd edition it was called "feats / special abilities" but the 3rd version is treated like Abe Simpson. It was not about just saying "I swing my sword" and roll the dice, I'm sorry if you had this kind of RPG experience...
Previous editions of DnD have relied on standard attacks for melee characters with spell casters having a wide variety of choice in the spells that they cast.
an Human Fighter in DnD can have 21 Feats at 20th lvl... and you say that he didn't had ANY type of combat power and that they "copied" from the MMO Formula? wake up
still on the fighter (since you used as example), show me an MMO where i can Cleave my enemy...
I think you forgot to say that DnD 4th edition learned from MMO's the Experience and Level System too!!!!!
common...
Non-spell casters can now take advantage of specific attack powers that are gained through level progression in much the same way that characters in a standard level-based MMO gain new attack powers.
Not only the feats are gained through leveling up in DnD 3rd (and AD&D for instance), but we choose wich type of special-out-of-standard-attack to "buy" next level.
It's nothing personal, but you're threating this subject with less care than required.. DnD have a huge public and I believe that everyone who played some of the previous versions knows that special attacks and character classes are the oldest features of this RPG, not something learned now!
Now, instead of simply telling the DM that my fighter wants to attack, rolling a die to see if I hit and repeating as often as is necessary, I am able to say that I want to use “Spinning Sweep” (a knockdown attack) or Brute Strike (a heavy damage power). I still have to roll the dice to see whether or not I hit, but I am able to use more strategy and thought than I ever could before.
Playing DnD 3rd edition was not like that AT ALL... way too different... if you look even at AD&D (the second edition of the game, wich was developed 20 years ago you find special abilities and class powers (to not talk about classes templates) for every character role... how can you say "Now i'm able to use Brute Strike for more damage"... okay, before that we could do a Power Attack (a feat). At first level I can have Power Attack and Cleave, for example, and do a lot of tactics with it... imagine on the 20th... the variety of feats and special abilities, if you put together all the books made to 3rd edition, is more than ANY MMO.
MMO's have many lessons to learn from RPG games... because in mmo the character looks all the same, just change the armor color. But two people playing as Fighters could be completely different, because you can choose wich type of fighter you want to be... and that depends on many decisions.... I'll have more dexterity or strength? I'll have combat feats or passive feats? I'll have social skills (diplomacy, for example) or action skills (move silently, spot, acrobatics, etc)?
It should be noted that 3rd Edition and 3.5 both allowed for some diversity in abilities for non-casters through the use of feats, but 4th Edition is where the combat powers really start to reflect those of an MMO.
"SOME" diversity? every character (don't matter the class) can take a look to a full page of feats to choose a few different abilities.... while the casters had only one or two (if human), the fighter could start with 3 feats... enough to make a lot of combinations. More than any other... The rogue starts with up to 40+ skilll points, being able to buy more skills than any other... and in DnD I can actually use skills in combat and in other momments of the game... while in MMO's, the skills are the name of the system that looks like the feats system (without the freedom of do whatever i want to my char).
The content and the system of DnD 3rd Edition is a lot deeper and more original than any MMO on the market today.
My advice to you is that you research more before make an article like that, because people who plays DnD knows that you're wrong in this subject (sorry, no offenses here, trying to be constructive).
I really like the articles of mmorpg.com , but this time looks more like a marketing review due the release of this new version... trying to attract MMO players to DnD.
I say to MMO players: play real RPG too... it's a lot better, it's full customizable and you have total freedom to do whatever you want. But instead of using your computer, you use your brain. Instead of seeing numbers jumping up the monster's head, you play a ROLE .... by the way, how is "character roles" new to you if the game is named ROLE PLAYING GAME? While the Massive Multiplayer thing looks more like a "play alone in your room with a bunch of people you don't know " (wich is fun sometimes) RPG could be defined as "gather with friends to play a character you create in a story you create with the rules that you like and having fun"
Or: this are two completely different things.
It's like saying that the World Cup is based on Winning Eleven
saying that WoTC created an offline mmo ?!? okay... i though that mmorpg was an online version of pen and paper rpg... not the opposite
(really... "RPG is an Off-line Massively Multiplayer Online RPG" ....) paradox mode on
I also really like how they are doing the online aspect of D&D. The idea of a virtual gaming table is just brilliant. It gives all us pen and paper rpg fans a way to play with friends easier.
The thing is D%D isnt the first ones to come up with Virtual Tabletops that you can play pnp games on. They have been around for years., some for free, some that have a one time fee. The only thing that DnD is doing is adding a monthly subscription to it.
If your interested in other virtual tabletops check out : www.fouruglymonsters.com. This is an online community that use and talk about different VTTs.
I've been playing RPGs (pen&paper) for almost 15 years now. Played many kinds of games and systems, and my faithful group has had its share of homemade systems.
RPG is about freedom - to be what you want, do you what you want. If we find a rule we don't agree with, we change it. If something in the story book isn't reasonable, we change it.
And if the new rules for D&D (for this discussion) don't please us, will bend them, change them, scrap them if needed. Heck, gimme the first edition of D&D and we'll have a blast. Gimme one die and we'll still have a blast.
Discussing systems is pointless - what matters is your imagination. Have fun!
D&D will always be AD&D 2nd edition for me (crica 1980 or so). This is was before feats, and everything else that seemed to complicate the game playing. The path it seemed to take after the 2nd edition was a game of mathematics by adding pluses and minues from all these different skills that were introduced, and forgetting about keeping it simple and fun.
Originally posted by rev_lazaro 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.
Shouldn't you be on a porch somewhere yelling at some kids?
I usually like MMORPG.com articles... really. but not this time. Being a DnD player since that time whem mmo was just Ultima, this articles sounds at least wrong. When you talk about character roles, please quote a game where I choose "Leader" as a role? It's not a new concept to form groups where each player has his role. It's not something that MMO is teaching, this concept exist since the first DnD version (waaaaay before mmo games), but they decide to call it classes instead of roles. MMOs have been using terms like these to describe the roles of the classes for quite some time. Rounding out a solid MMO group is almost always reliant on having characters that can fill each of these roles. While the same has been true of Dungeons and Dragons in the past in a passive way, 4th Edition marks the first time that the game’s design has incorporated it and spelled it out in terms that are so familiar to online RPG players. Well, since the beginning of DnD it was a wise choice to make a group with different classes... or imagine 5 people around a table playing a Cleric... about the combat powers, news for you... they also existed all this time... in the 3rd edition it was called "feats / special abilities" but the 3rd version is treated like Abe Simpson. It was not about just saying "I swing my sword" and roll the dice, I'm sorry if you had this kind of RPG experience... Previous editions of DnD have relied on standard attacks for melee characters with spell casters having a wide variety of choice in the spells that they cast. an Human Fighter in DnD can have 21 Feats at 20th lvl... and you say that he didn't had ANY type of combat power and that they "copied" from the MMO Formula? wake up still on the fighter (since you used as example), show me an MMO where i can Cleave my enemy... I think you forgot to say that DnD 4th edition learned from MMO's the Experience and Level System too!!!!!
common... Non-spell casters can now take advantage of specific attack powers that are gained through level progression in much the same way that characters in a standard level-based MMO gain new attack powers. Not only the feats are gained through leveling up in DnD 3rd (and AD&D for instance), but we choose wich type of special-out-of-standard-attack to "buy" next level. It's nothing personal, but you're threating this subject with less care than required.. DnD have a huge public and I believe that everyone who played some of the previous versions knows that special attacks and character classes are the oldest features of this RPG, not something learned now! Now, instead of simply telling the DM that my fighter wants to attack, rolling a die to see if I hit and repeating as often as is necessary, I am able to say that I want to use “Spinning Sweep” (a knockdown attack) or Brute Strike (a heavy damage power). I still have to roll the dice to see whether or not I hit, but I am able to use more strategy and thought than I ever could before. Playing DnD 3rd edition was not like that AT ALL... way too different... if you look even at AD&D (the second edition of the game, wich was developed 20 years ago you find special abilities and class powers (to not talk about classes templates) for every character role... how can you say "Now i'm able to use Brute Strike for more damage"... okay, before that we could do a Power Attack (a feat). At first level I can have Power Attack and Cleave, for example, and do a lot of tactics with it... imagine on the 20th... the variety of feats and special abilities, if you put together all the books made to 3rd edition, is more than ANY MMO. MMO's have many lessons to learn from RPG games... because in mmo the character looks all the same, just change the armor color. But two people playing as Fighters could be completely different, because you can choose wich type of fighter you want to be... and that depends on many decisions.... I'll have more dexterity or strength? I'll have combat feats or passive feats? I'll have social skills (diplomacy, for example) or action skills (move silently, spot, acrobatics, etc)? It should be noted that 3rd Edition and 3.5 both allowed for some diversity in abilities for non-casters through the use of feats, but 4th Edition is where the combat powers really start to reflect those of an MMO. "SOME" diversity? every character (don't matter the class) can take a look to a full page of feats to choose a few different abilities.... while the casters had only one or two (if human), the fighter could start with 3 feats... enough to make a lot of combinations. More than any other... The rogue starts with up to 40+ skilll points, being able to buy more skills than any other... and in DnD I can actually use skills in combat and in other momments of the game... while in MMO's, the skills are the name of the system that looks like the feats system (without the freedom of do whatever i want to my char). The content and the system of DnD 3rd Edition is a lot deeper and more original than any MMO on the market today. My advice to you is that you research more before make an article like that, because people who plays DnD knows that you're wrong in this subject (sorry, no offenses here, trying to be constructive).
I really like the articles of mmorpg.com , but this time looks more like a marketing review due the release of this new version... trying to attract MMO players to DnD. I say to MMO players: play real RPG too... it's a lot better, it's full customizable and you have total freedom to do whatever you want. But instead of using your computer, you use your brain. Instead of seeing numbers jumping up the monster's head, you play a ROLE .... by the way, how is "character roles" new to you if the game is named ROLE PLAYING GAME? While the Massive Multiplayer thing looks more like a "play alone in your room with a bunch of people you don't know " (wich is fun sometimes) RPG could be defined as "gather with friends to play a character you create in a story you create with the rules that you like and having fun" Or: this are two completely different things. It's like saying that the World Cup is based on Winning Eleven saying that WoTC created an offline mmo ?!? okay... i though that mmorpg was an online version of pen and paper rpg... not the opposite (really... "RPG is an Off-line Massively Multiplayer Online RPG" ....) paradox mode on
Being a gamer who owns a large amount of the second edition as well as the old first edition with all the little pamplet style booklets, I can see where you are coming from in this post. I have to add, back with the older games, yes you COULD make special attacks such as sweeping attacks, and power strikes. That was part of being inventive, coming up with new ways and using your own brain to come up with inventive ways to over come your opponents. It was called personal initiative. I think that is one of the reasons some of the older gamers take exception wih the newer revisions. All of the imagination and personal immersion levels (Maybe immersion is the wrong word here) that come from "becoming" more a part of your character whn you ROLE PLAY are being replaced by preset attacks. A Good DM from "back in the day" would improvise according to what players would come up with. Player: "I want to swing my axe in a large circle and try to knock some of the swarming ratmen back" DM: "Okay, make your hitroll with a -5 modifier" or some crap. Maybe throw in a strength roll for knock back, or if hitroll fails, a dex roll to make sre you are not knocked down instead. It saddens me, personally, to see things get so dumbed down (In my opinion!) and leaving less to the imagination of the players. Overcoming scenarios should be about imagination, not some preset skills that keep people in a rush to get teh phat loots.
The Online Table is great idea but it should have been done 5-10 years ago. The technology was there but Wizards never bothered with it. It took WoW and MMORPGs to get them off their rears, but at least it's here now.
I agree with you SunderGhost. That's why I expect players to describe exactly what they are doing in combat. The feats itselfs just tell the player that his character is able to do something that others don't (and others can do things that he don't).... this is part of our lifes... there are thing we simply can't do for one reason or another (but we can learn, through experience).
most of the players know that... but looks like Jon Wood doesn't.
Maybe because people who play MMO forgot about the other half of the acronym... the RPG. The online games should learn something from Real RPG: RolePlay.
Many people will say "oh, but it's possible to role play in mmo's". I've tryed a few times with a lot of different games... but in the end, no one does it, so what is the point of playing? Just to kill monsters and other players to show you're the best? Some games have features allowing players to make changes in the world they live in... but in the end is just a "mutual solo experience", since every fighter in the server has to do the same quests and kill the same monsters. When will we see a game where the role play count?
Elder Scroll: Oblivion is something close to that, since I can choose my paths, my quests, my objectives and my combat style... If I do something wrong like killing people, the guards will come after me... I can be arrested, or escape, or just give guards some monney. And this kind of stuff will make a difference in the end.
But MMO's in general don't have not even this kind of feature. You just choose a class and now you're full of limits like wich weapon to use and what kind of attack you can do.
Exceptions in my opinion would be games like EVE, where I found a lot of people roleplaying, because the game itselfs encourage that.
In the end is pointless to discuss this.... the reason I'm mad about this is quite simple: people who doesn't understand RPG talking about RPG, saying that MMO changed the rpg industry while the things you claim as new and inovative already existed for about 20 years.
You should say exactly the opposite... you should ask "when mmorpg will become real rpg?" or "when mmo players will become rpg players?"
I think that this will take a looooong time to happen, because technology has limits.... our brain don't
4th edition, having tried it, feels like a mmorpg. It seems to me that they watered d20 down for the sake of making it easier to program into games. I enjoyed 3rd and 3.5, I found it better than 2nd edition; even though I thought 3.5 could get overly complicated at times 4th is overly simplified. My friends and I are sticking to 3.5. Maybe 5th will be better. PnP games though the inspiration for mmorpg, despite this odd co-mingling, they really are two separate entities.
All the web utilities really could have been done for 3rd its really about time. I really don't know if 4th will bring anything to the table. Most independent developers want to continue working with 3.5, mostly because its establish but also because 4th ed isn't free for them to make modules for. Bye bye open gaming license. All that said you have to question what will come out of 4th that benefits the players.
I also really like how they are doing the online aspect of D&D. The idea of a virtual gaming table is just brilliant. It gives all us pen and paper rpg fans a way to play with friends easier.
The thing is D%D isnt the first ones to come up with Virtual Tabletops that you can play pnp games on. They have been around for years., some for free, some that have a one time fee. The only thing that DnD is doing is adding a monthly subscription to it.
If your interested in other virtual tabletops check out : www.fouruglymonsters.com. This is an online community that use and talk about different VTTs.
Actually I do realise that Wizards was not the first to do a virtual tabletop. But I think that it is pretty neat that they have their own officially supported version for the game. Yes it is true that there is a small subscription price but you also get other support material for the game. Thanks for the link though. I will have to go check it out.
after trying out the new 4th edition game, all i can say is i got soooooooo bored. New rules make it a pure hack and slash game, the entire rules focus pretty much on combat, spells are completly combat based now with a mere handful of exceptions. The characters now don't even invite any kind of noncombative roleplaying. They have no life, i just call them the class cause the next one i make seems strangely just like the last one. I will definatly stick with 3.5, very streamlined system that allows you to make an actual person, with history, strengths and weaknesses unique to that character. And i love how things have these additional effects that last until you save and after level 5 or so its extremly hard to fail a saving throw which makes all that stuff basically mute and near pointless and alot of bookkeeping.
This leads me to the rather depressing notion that roleplaying is almost dead, catering to the unimaginative fast reward seekers. I love hearing all the cries of how rules are secondary to the story and imagination and with Every one i have played who said that had house rules created to cover things ALREADY in the book, they just haven't even bothered to read the thing or understand it. A strong solid ruleset is the foundation upon which the imagination can be built, am i saying that we need to be rule nazis. No. But once you have a strong understanding of the rules they provide the structure for a good strong coherent and believable story, and you shouldn't be running games unless you have that, and if you dont then go for 4th edition cause as long as you can run combat thats all you need!
It's a good idea, but I truly hope they really develop the table top tools really extensively because that is one thing about PnP over MMOs is the ability to do whatever your imagination desires. But with any computer based form of table top you will always have restrictions. "IF" they can surpass most of the restrictions then this would be worthwhile.
But I find it so funny that 4th edition has made such a turn. And honestly i don't think it would have if things wouldn't have exploded as they have in the MMO genre. And of course it is fitting they would want a piece of the pie. I'm sure DDO that turbine made probably isn't producing the numbers they may have liked or wanted, so now they redevelop things so that it fits easier.
This could be their downfall now, they are no longer "unique" and they have joined the Joneses so to speak.
So it all depends on who can display and represent the information the best for what people are looking for.
But this could be really big for the majority of the hardcore RP community... but not so great for much else. So it would be wise if the toolset for the premium service of theirs includes much of what roleplayers would love and need.
of course this is going to make for some interesting new MMO games from Wizards of the Coast and whatever designer they go with, i'm hoping we see a new Bioware MMO based on this ruleset in the not so distant future.
I agree with so many of the points, on both sides of the issue. However, I fall into the catergory of those who hate to see D&D fall into this pattern. I don't agree with locked in character types. I have not played table top D&D in several years due to various reasons but I began playing when I was 8 yrs old. ( I am now 34 and still a gamer at heart) I do hate what MMORPG's are developing into .. but I can agree with the poster who said that the demands of today's up and coming gamers are different than ours, and I don't necessarily think that is completely a good thing. I just don't think that people should lose the imagination that goes into gaming, and the effort that it takes to make it fun. Instant gratification and class lock ins to tell you what to do is not the same gaming whether it is table top or computer.
Hopefully, those who say the rules are just guide lines and core can change things to fit the players, will continue to play that way and keep it fun.
I played 1st Edition D&D and have played all editons since, with the bulk of my play in AD&D 2nd edition. I've looked at the ruleset for 4th edition and am frankly appalled. The game only resembles D&D by name only. This is not the game I love and enjoy anymore. Wizards of the Coast has purchased a name and then put a different product in the box simply because they thought it would make them more money. This really feels like a George Lucas ruining the original Star Wars trilogy kind of thing....Han shot first...magic missiles ALWAYS hits.
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:
Maybe if people quit buying WOTC's shitty products they will quit making them. I'm still trying to figure out the necessity of the 3rd edition, let alone the 4th.
I am very much looking forward to both DM'ing and playing 4E. I've been around since AD&D and I like the fact that alot of the rules were either numbed down, or clarified. Got all the created material on release day and I've been messing about creating an adventure for this comming weekend for my group.
The only thing I'm worried about is the time it will take for them to release the different "world" books. And the players Handbook 2
Otherwise it looks quite alright, you can focus more on the story than you could in 3.X due to the ruleset.
Hm, I've played lots of D&D in my time. Didn't quite start off with 1st. ed, I'm not quite that old, but I did make a few 2nd ed characters and played a few times. 3rd ed. hit it off big, mainly because it was simple, fast to run and relatively 'brainless' for the DM... At least, compared to Rolemaster (rulesmonster!), Hârnmaster, GURPS, Legend of Five Rings, Palladium FRPG (1st ed) etc. that we were regularly running campaigns and one-shots in our group.
3.5 didn't really complicate 3rd ed that much, it mainly clarified some things and rebalanced others, even if it did clip my wizard character down a notch. Both have a serious drawback though: Most rules center around combat, just like in any other RPG, but there's no way to advance your character without directly fighting bigger and badder monsters.
There were limited choices, which made things interesting when building your character, but in the end, it was too much about combat to keep our group interested after the 'shine' had worn off and our characters started hitting lvl18-19.
Still, making new character concepts for 3E and 3.5 is still something I like playing around with, and I still play at an old Neverwinter Nights Persistant World server (City of Arabel, check it out!) when the mood takes me.
From what I've heard and what I just read, 4th ed. will center even more around combat, removing 'useless' skills from the ruleset, 'rebalancing' the classes to more streamlined combat model with very strict roles for each class/subclass. Each character will have a function, and will have to perform that one, and that one only, function in combat, for the group to succeed. Secondary attributes outside combat (social skills, interaction skills, non-combat problem resolution skills) are thrown away or at least marginalized.
A system like that is all well and good for a MMOG, where the quest line is a linear progression, and, say, talking your way past a guard is only possible if the plot spesifically allows for it. It's IMO far less useful for pen&paper games if the DM runs anything beyond a simple dungeon crawl, y'know, the one that starts "You enter the dark and dank dungeon. You see a gnoll ahead of you, it's got a spear in its grubby paws."
Personally, I find games like that occasionally fun, but relatively non-roleplayish.
BTW: My first association for the 'Trinity' was for White Wolfs sci-fi game title "AEON Trinity", which I've both played and run some rounds in. The real meaning is apt, however. Not everyone can be classed to 'DPS, CC, Healer', as any decently built cleric of Tempus, Helm or Torm can easily demonstrate. "What do you mean, healing? I hit stuff with a big axe! My god demands it!"
I wonder if the VTT from WotC will allow you to create house rules . . . or revert back to 3E or 3.5E.
I think a good thing would be to let the DM do anything he pleases. If I want to throw my axe with a rope tied to it through a window and swing across, but the VTT rules do not allow for that, the sytem should let the player make his dice roles (whatever the DM says he needs) and let the DM move the character to where he is supposed to be. Did that make sense?
Comments
I must say I am impressed from what I am seeing and from what I have read thus far I find it far more appealing than the 3.0 or the 3.5 incantations of DnD's game engine. I like how it seems they finally realized that making complex rules for a game engine that obviously could not handle it would no longer work unless they created a completely different game engine . Instead of creating a new engine to run a complex game (which would alienate the entire DnD populace and reduce the number of incoming gamers due to its complexity and far removal from the previous game engine) they gutted the entire rule system surrounding their game and created a whole different rule set which I find refreshing. I also think this change finally puts DnD in its proper place as a high powered heroic fantasy game and not a half ass simulator with super powers. Honestly any one talking about an intellectual challenge or true customization shouldn’t have ever been being playing DnD instead you should have headed to GURPS for that level of play.
/sigh
AD&D inspired the cookie cutter MMOs like WoW.
Now AD&D "learns" from those...
It's a shame so many people think pen&paper RPGs = AD&D, because that means:
- the good p&p RPGs are only played by a few privileged ones,
- MMOs get inspired by AD&D too much, and we see no diversity on top of silly inherited game mechanics.
---
Waiting for: GW2
*thumbs up*: GW, Eve(, WoW)
*thumbs down*: MO, GA, FE
trust me, if he hated the new rules then he would have said something about it, he would have refused to do PR for it (he did quite a bit)
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
I've DM'ed 2nd and 3rd/3.5 ed.
In my latest campaign, based on 3.5 rules, I introduced what I called "world skills," which were basically a set of additional skills that people could take and put points into on top of the usual DnD skills. These included things like fishing, gardening, drink mixing, ladder crafting, and so on. My players absolutely loved it, because it allowed them to make things they would usually just be able to RP, and turn them into actual game mechanics with real uses. For example the guy who could mix drinks could make dangerous potions that could be used as flask weapons. The guy who could fish could buy tackle and bait, then go to the deep seas and fish for treasure. So mundane skills DO have a use, but it depends on how creative your players are. Fortunately I play with a very experienced group, where everyone has over 20 years of DnD experience.
After reading through the 4th ed core books, I've come to the conclusion that in order to play it I'd have to seriously gut the rules. 3/3.5 needed some editing on my part to make it playable for my campaigns, 4 will need a lot. That said, 4's combat is somewhat streamlined on some fronts, which is nice, but a lot of things are missing or simply wrong. It does not, in my opinion, promote tactical and difficult combat. I want my players to fear death, to know that the things they fight could kill them, and that in order to win they must be on top of their game.
Well I would not go as far as saying that Gygax is turning over in his grave. I can say this though. I have talked with him on various messages boards and I can say for a 100% fact that he DID NOT like the 3/3.5 edition of D&D. One of the main reasons is because it made D&D too complex.
Hence the reason for him designing his own game(Lejendary Adventures) which is rules lite. While he maybe might not have liked some of the changes of 4e D&D. I am sure that he would have liked the fact that Wizards of the Coast at least made the game more accessable and easier to play.
I myself will always be partial to 1E AD&D(I did like 2E but not as much) but still I am optimistic about the 4E and will be getting it. It sounds pretty interesting and if it truly is easier to play then that is great. My wife has really taken an interest in D&D and maybe the 4E will be the way to go for her.
I also really like how they are doing the online aspect of D&D. The idea of a virtual gaming table is just brilliant. It gives all us pen and paper rpg fans a way to play with friends easier.
lol it seems WoW is killing all around even the foundation of rpg games!! XD
As 1st Edition Player, I can tell you that many skills were made up on the spot by DM-Player interaction.
PLAYER: "I'm going to tie my rope to my axe, try to throw it through the castle window, hope it catches on something, then swing over to the castle wall and climb through the window."
The DM at this point, might role some dice and actually use the results...
STRENGTH roll - top see if the character can throw that far, DEXTERITY ROLL- to see if they can aim that well, LUCK roll etc.
... or if she thought it was a good plan and it advanced the story, she might just agree to let it happen.
That is something that 3/3.5/and now 4th edition rules have supplanted. There was no rope skill or jump skill or throwing skill. The DM and the player worked it out because the most important thing was the story, not the rule book.
I'm not saying that the new way is bad, but it is a definite shift. And in most editions I think that there is a section about how the DMs should run their campaigns the way they want, regardless of the rules.
Will we ever see this type of playing in an MMO? I can only hope, but probably not soon.
_____________________________
"Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit"
I usually like MMORPG.com articles... really.
but not this time. Being a DnD player since that time whem mmo was just Ultima, this articles sounds at least wrong.
When you talk about character roles, please quote a game where I choose "Leader" as a role? It's not a new concept to form groups where each player has his role. It's not something that MMO is teaching, this concept exist since the first DnD version (waaaaay before mmo games), but they decide to call it classes instead of roles.
MMOs have been using terms like these to describe the roles of the classes for quite some time. Rounding out a solid MMO group is almost always reliant on having characters that can fill each of these roles. While the same has been true of Dungeons and Dragons in the past in a passive way, 4th Edition marks the first time that the game’s design has incorporated it and spelled it out in terms that are so familiar to online RPG players.
Well, since the beginning of DnD it was a wise choice to make a group with different classes... or imagine 5 people around a table playing a Cleric...
about the combat powers, news for you... they also existed all this time... in the 3rd edition it was called "feats / special abilities" but the 3rd version is treated like Abe Simpson. It was not about just saying "I swing my sword" and roll the dice, I'm sorry if you had this kind of RPG experience...
Previous editions of DnD have relied on standard attacks for melee characters with spell casters having a wide variety of choice in the spells that they cast.
an Human Fighter in DnD can have 21 Feats at 20th lvl... and you say that he didn't had ANY type of combat power and that they "copied" from the MMO Formula? wake up
still on the fighter (since you used as example), show me an MMO where i can Cleave my enemy...
I think you forgot to say that DnD 4th edition learned from MMO's the Experience and Level System too!!!!!
common...
Non-spell casters can now take advantage of specific attack powers that are gained through level progression in much the same way that characters in a standard level-based MMO gain new attack powers.
Not only the feats are gained through leveling up in DnD 3rd (and AD&D for instance), but we choose wich type of special-out-of-standard-attack to "buy" next level.
It's nothing personal, but you're threating this subject with less care than required.. DnD have a huge public and I believe that everyone who played some of the previous versions knows that special attacks and character classes are the oldest features of this RPG, not something learned now!
Now, instead of simply telling the DM that my fighter wants to attack, rolling a die to see if I hit and repeating as often as is necessary, I am able to say that I want to use “Spinning Sweep” (a knockdown attack) or Brute Strike (a heavy damage power). I still have to roll the dice to see whether or not I hit, but I am able to use more strategy and thought than I ever could before.
Playing DnD 3rd edition was not like that AT ALL... way too different... if you look even at AD&D (the second edition of the game, wich was developed 20 years ago you find special abilities and class powers (to not talk about classes templates) for every character role... how can you say "Now i'm able to use Brute Strike for more damage"... okay, before that we could do a Power Attack (a feat). At first level I can have Power Attack and Cleave, for example, and do a lot of tactics with it... imagine on the 20th... the variety of feats and special abilities, if you put together all the books made to 3rd edition, is more than ANY MMO.
MMO's have many lessons to learn from RPG games... because in mmo the character looks all the same, just change the armor color. But two people playing as Fighters could be completely different, because you can choose wich type of fighter you want to be... and that depends on many decisions.... I'll have more dexterity or strength? I'll have combat feats or passive feats? I'll have social skills (diplomacy, for example) or action skills (move silently, spot, acrobatics, etc)?
It should be noted that 3rd Edition and 3.5 both allowed for some diversity in abilities for non-casters through the use of feats, but 4th Edition is where the combat powers really start to reflect those of an MMO.
"SOME" diversity? every character (don't matter the class) can take a look to a full page of feats to choose a few different abilities.... while the casters had only one or two (if human), the fighter could start with 3 feats... enough to make a lot of combinations. More than any other... The rogue starts with up to 40+ skilll points, being able to buy more skills than any other... and in DnD I can actually use skills in combat and in other momments of the game... while in MMO's, the skills are the name of the system that looks like the feats system (without the freedom of do whatever i want to my char).
The content and the system of DnD 3rd Edition is a lot deeper and more original than any MMO on the market today.
My advice to you is that you research more before make an article like that, because people who plays DnD knows that you're wrong in this subject (sorry, no offenses here, trying to be constructive).
I really like the articles of mmorpg.com , but this time looks more like a marketing review due the release of this new version... trying to attract MMO players to DnD.
I say to MMO players: play real RPG too... it's a lot better, it's full customizable and you have total freedom to do whatever you want. But instead of using your computer, you use your brain. Instead of seeing numbers jumping up the monster's head, you play a ROLE .... by the way, how is "character roles" new to you if the game is named ROLE PLAYING GAME? While the Massive Multiplayer thing looks more like a "play alone in your room with a bunch of people you don't know " (wich is fun sometimes) RPG could be defined as "gather with friends to play a character you create in a story you create with the rules that you like and having fun"
Or: this are two completely different things.
It's like saying that the World Cup is based on Winning Eleven
saying that WoTC created an offline mmo ?!? okay... i though that mmorpg was an online version of pen and paper rpg... not the opposite
(really... "RPG is an Off-line Massively Multiplayer Online RPG" ....) paradox mode on
The thing is D%D isnt the first ones to come up with Virtual Tabletops that you can play pnp games on. They have been around for years., some for free, some that have a one time fee. The only thing that DnD is doing is adding a monthly subscription to it.
If your interested in other virtual tabletops check out : www.fouruglymonsters.com. This is an online community that use and talk about different VTTs.
I've been playing RPGs (pen&paper) for almost 15 years now. Played many kinds of games and systems, and my faithful group has had its share of homemade systems.
RPG is about freedom - to be what you want, do you what you want. If we find a rule we don't agree with, we change it. If something in the story book isn't reasonable, we change it.
And if the new rules for D&D (for this discussion) don't please us, will bend them, change them, scrap them if needed. Heck, gimme the first edition of D&D and we'll have a blast. Gimme one die and we'll still have a blast.
Discussing systems is pointless - what matters is your imagination. Have fun!
D&D will always be AD&D 2nd edition for me (crica 1980 or so). This is was before feats, and everything else that seemed to complicate the game playing. The path it seemed to take after the 2nd edition was a game of mathematics by adding pluses and minues from all these different skills that were introduced, and forgetting about keeping it simple and fun.
Just my 2 cents...
Shouldn't you be on a porch somewhere yelling at some kids?
Being a gamer who owns a large amount of the second edition as well as the old first edition with all the little pamplet style booklets, I can see where you are coming from in this post. I have to add, back with the older games, yes you COULD make special attacks such as sweeping attacks, and power strikes. That was part of being inventive, coming up with new ways and using your own brain to come up with inventive ways to over come your opponents. It was called personal initiative. I think that is one of the reasons some of the older gamers take exception wih the newer revisions. All of the imagination and personal immersion levels (Maybe immersion is the wrong word here) that come from "becoming" more a part of your character whn you ROLE PLAY are being replaced by preset attacks. A Good DM from "back in the day" would improvise according to what players would come up with. Player: "I want to swing my axe in a large circle and try to knock some of the swarming ratmen back" DM: "Okay, make your hitroll with a -5 modifier" or some crap. Maybe throw in a strength roll for knock back, or if hitroll fails, a dex roll to make sre you are not knocked down instead. It saddens me, personally, to see things get so dumbed down (In my opinion!) and leaving less to the imagination of the players. Overcoming scenarios should be about imagination, not some preset skills that keep people in a rush to get teh phat loots.
The Online Table is great idea but it should have been done 5-10 years ago. The technology was there but Wizards never bothered with it. It took WoW and MMORPGs to get them off their rears, but at least it's here now.
I agree with you SunderGhost. That's why I expect players to describe exactly what they are doing in combat. The feats itselfs just tell the player that his character is able to do something that others don't (and others can do things that he don't).... this is part of our lifes... there are thing we simply can't do for one reason or another (but we can learn, through experience).
most of the players know that... but looks like Jon Wood doesn't.
Maybe because people who play MMO forgot about the other half of the acronym... the RPG. The online games should learn something from Real RPG: RolePlay.
Many people will say "oh, but it's possible to role play in mmo's". I've tryed a few times with a lot of different games... but in the end, no one does it, so what is the point of playing? Just to kill monsters and other players to show you're the best? Some games have features allowing players to make changes in the world they live in... but in the end is just a "mutual solo experience", since every fighter in the server has to do the same quests and kill the same monsters. When will we see a game where the role play count?
Elder Scroll: Oblivion is something close to that, since I can choose my paths, my quests, my objectives and my combat style... If I do something wrong like killing people, the guards will come after me... I can be arrested, or escape, or just give guards some monney. And this kind of stuff will make a difference in the end.
But MMO's in general don't have not even this kind of feature. You just choose a class and now you're full of limits like wich weapon to use and what kind of attack you can do.
Exceptions in my opinion would be games like EVE, where I found a lot of people roleplaying, because the game itselfs encourage that.
In the end is pointless to discuss this.... the reason I'm mad about this is quite simple: people who doesn't understand RPG talking about RPG, saying that MMO changed the rpg industry while the things you claim as new and inovative already existed for about 20 years.
You should say exactly the opposite... you should ask "when mmorpg will become real rpg?" or "when mmo players will become rpg players?"
I think that this will take a looooong time to happen, because technology has limits.... our brain don't
4th edition, having tried it, feels like a mmorpg. It seems to me that they watered d20 down for the sake of making it easier to program into games. I enjoyed 3rd and 3.5, I found it better than 2nd edition; even though I thought 3.5 could get overly complicated at times 4th is overly simplified. My friends and I are sticking to 3.5. Maybe 5th will be better. PnP games though the inspiration for mmorpg, despite this odd co-mingling, they really are two separate entities.
All the web utilities really could have been done for 3rd its really about time. I really don't know if 4th will bring anything to the table. Most independent developers want to continue working with 3.5, mostly because its establish but also because 4th ed isn't free for them to make modules for. Bye bye open gaming license. All that said you have to question what will come out of 4th that benefits the players.
The thing is D%D isnt the first ones to come up with Virtual Tabletops that you can play pnp games on. They have been around for years., some for free, some that have a one time fee. The only thing that DnD is doing is adding a monthly subscription to it.
If your interested in other virtual tabletops check out : www.fouruglymonsters.com. This is an online community that use and talk about different VTTs.
Actually I do realise that Wizards was not the first to do a virtual tabletop. But I think that it is pretty neat that they have their own officially supported version for the game. Yes it is true that there is a small subscription price but you also get other support material for the game. Thanks for the link though. I will have to go check it out.
after trying out the new 4th edition game, all i can say is i got soooooooo bored. New rules make it a pure hack and slash game, the entire rules focus pretty much on combat, spells are completly combat based now with a mere handful of exceptions. The characters now don't even invite any kind of noncombative roleplaying. They have no life, i just call them the class cause the next one i make seems strangely just like the last one. I will definatly stick with 3.5, very streamlined system that allows you to make an actual person, with history, strengths and weaknesses unique to that character. And i love how things have these additional effects that last until you save and after level 5 or so its extremly hard to fail a saving throw which makes all that stuff basically mute and near pointless and alot of bookkeeping.
This leads me to the rather depressing notion that roleplaying is almost dead, catering to the unimaginative fast reward seekers. I love hearing all the cries of how rules are secondary to the story and imagination and with Every one i have played who said that had house rules created to cover things ALREADY in the book, they just haven't even bothered to read the thing or understand it. A strong solid ruleset is the foundation upon which the imagination can be built, am i saying that we need to be rule nazis. No. But once you have a strong understanding of the rules they provide the structure for a good strong coherent and believable story, and you shouldn't be running games unless you have that, and if you dont then go for 4th edition cause as long as you can run combat thats all you need!
This is real interesting...
It's a good idea, but I truly hope they really develop the table top tools really extensively because that is one thing about PnP over MMOs is the ability to do whatever your imagination desires. But with any computer based form of table top you will always have restrictions. "IF" they can surpass most of the restrictions then this would be worthwhile.
But I find it so funny that 4th edition has made such a turn. And honestly i don't think it would have if things wouldn't have exploded as they have in the MMO genre. And of course it is fitting they would want a piece of the pie. I'm sure DDO that turbine made probably isn't producing the numbers they may have liked or wanted, so now they redevelop things so that it fits easier.
This could be their downfall now, they are no longer "unique" and they have joined the Joneses so to speak.
So it all depends on who can display and represent the information the best for what people are looking for.
But this could be really big for the majority of the hardcore RP community... but not so great for much else. So it would be wise if the toolset for the premium service of theirs includes much of what roleplayers would love and need.
of course this is going to make for some interesting new MMO games from Wizards of the Coast and whatever designer they go with, i'm hoping we see a new Bioware MMO based on this ruleset in the not so distant future.
I agree with so many of the points, on both sides of the issue. However, I fall into the catergory of those who hate to see D&D fall into this pattern. I don't agree with locked in character types. I have not played table top D&D in several years due to various reasons but I began playing when I was 8 yrs old. ( I am now 34 and still a gamer at heart) I do hate what MMORPG's are developing into .. but I can agree with the poster who said that the demands of today's up and coming gamers are different than ours, and I don't necessarily think that is completely a good thing. I just don't think that people should lose the imagination that goes into gaming, and the effort that it takes to make it fun. Instant gratification and class lock ins to tell you what to do is not the same gaming whether it is table top or computer.
Hopefully, those who say the rules are just guide lines and core can change things to fit the players, will continue to play that way and keep it fun.
I played 1st Edition D&D and have played all editons since, with the bulk of my play in AD&D 2nd edition. I've looked at the ruleset for 4th edition and am frankly appalled. The game only resembles D&D by name only. This is not the game I love and enjoy anymore. Wizards of the Coast has purchased a name and then put a different product in the box simply because they thought it would make them more money. This really feels like a George Lucas ruining the original Star Wars trilogy kind of thing....Han shot first...magic missiles ALWAYS hits.
Read the article here.
Maybe if people quit buying WOTC's shitty products they will quit making them. I'm still trying to figure out the necessity of the 3rd edition, let alone the 4th.
I am very much looking forward to both DM'ing and playing 4E. I've been around since AD&D and I like the fact that alot of the rules were either numbed down, or clarified. Got all the created material on release day and I've been messing about creating an adventure for this comming weekend for my group.
The only thing I'm worried about is the time it will take for them to release the different "world" books. And the players Handbook 2
Otherwise it looks quite alright, you can focus more on the story than you could in 3.X due to the ruleset.
Hm, I've played lots of D&D in my time. Didn't quite start off with 1st. ed, I'm not quite that old, but I did make a few 2nd ed characters and played a few times. 3rd ed. hit it off big, mainly because it was simple, fast to run and relatively 'brainless' for the DM... At least, compared to Rolemaster (rulesmonster!), Hârnmaster, GURPS, Legend of Five Rings, Palladium FRPG (1st ed) etc. that we were regularly running campaigns and one-shots in our group.
3.5 didn't really complicate 3rd ed that much, it mainly clarified some things and rebalanced others, even if it did clip my wizard character down a notch. Both have a serious drawback though: Most rules center around combat, just like in any other RPG, but there's no way to advance your character without directly fighting bigger and badder monsters.
There were limited choices, which made things interesting when building your character, but in the end, it was too much about combat to keep our group interested after the 'shine' had worn off and our characters started hitting lvl18-19.
Still, making new character concepts for 3E and 3.5 is still something I like playing around with, and I still play at an old Neverwinter Nights Persistant World server (City of Arabel, check it out!) when the mood takes me.
From what I've heard and what I just read, 4th ed. will center even more around combat, removing 'useless' skills from the ruleset, 'rebalancing' the classes to more streamlined combat model with very strict roles for each class/subclass. Each character will have a function, and will have to perform that one, and that one only, function in combat, for the group to succeed. Secondary attributes outside combat (social skills, interaction skills, non-combat problem resolution skills) are thrown away or at least marginalized.
A system like that is all well and good for a MMOG, where the quest line is a linear progression, and, say, talking your way past a guard is only possible if the plot spesifically allows for it. It's IMO far less useful for pen&paper games if the DM runs anything beyond a simple dungeon crawl, y'know, the one that starts "You enter the dark and dank dungeon. You see a gnoll ahead of you, it's got a spear in its grubby paws."
Personally, I find games like that occasionally fun, but relatively non-roleplayish.
BTW: My first association for the 'Trinity' was for White Wolfs sci-fi game title "AEON Trinity", which I've both played and run some rounds in. The real meaning is apt, however. Not everyone can be classed to 'DPS, CC, Healer', as any decently built cleric of Tempus, Helm or Torm can easily demonstrate. "What do you mean, healing? I hit stuff with a big axe! My god demands it!"
I wonder if the VTT from WotC will allow you to create house rules . . . or revert back to 3E or 3.5E.
I think a good thing would be to let the DM do anything he pleases. If I want to throw my axe with a rope tied to it through a window and swing across, but the VTT rules do not allow for that, the sytem should let the player make his dice roles (whatever the DM says he needs) and let the DM move the character to where he is supposed to be. Did that make sense?