You can't attribute classes and leveling to just DnD, that was followed by umpteen role playing table-top games. It is not as if skill based for example never had a look in, it did just not do as well. But I would really like to see some of the more interesting RPG takes on a rules system given a go.
I 100% attribute classes and leveling to DnD, since they were the first to do it. The umpteen role-playing tabletop games are unmentionable because they were mostly just copies of DnD or so far from the genre that you can't really compare them. World of Darkness has some of the most creative writing and lore I've ever read, but the game itself is just a sea of d10s and focuses more on role-playing than gameplay mechanics. I will agree with you on wanting to see some more interesting takes on RPG rule systems.
Honestly, entirely too many MMOs treat role playing as merely 'character speech'. They provide multiple chat channels and some emotes, toss in some combat/magic rules, add a dash of crafting, build a world with monsters to fight and call it an MMORPG. I'd like to see an online game tackle the basics of 'meaning' of communications, and have those impact the game (change the NPCs actions, attitudes, etc.) Where are the basics of 'reputation' to other players; not those pre-made factions with NPCs that do nothing except keep NPC guards from killing you on sight?
What about the mysterious lady who wears a dark green robe, and when she occasionally sings in the tavern, everyone who hears her (players included) remember it? Or the scruffy old man who dreams of finding his children again, but won't let anyone help? How about a couple exchanging a secret handshake? Where are the mechanics to allow players to do those type of things?
In table top, we rely on the GM/DM to provide those things. MMOs haven't yet evolved to a point where 'dynamic content' is the goal, and developers haven't really adopted AI for much beyond path finding.
(Also, I'd agree that D&D started the whole mess, including many of the issues many people still have issues with. It's unlikely that T&T (Tunnels & Trolls, i.e., the first clone) did this much original.)
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I may be a complete outsider on this, but I'm not too sure about the use of 5e rules as a basis for an MMORPG. I drifted away from D&D pretty early on, as the rules just never were adequate. That seems to still be the case with the 5e rule set. So, the use of 5e rules *might* draw some people in; just not me.
I'm more concerned that the Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro might lawyer up to protect their IP (the underlying gaming rules). I'd really hate to see promising ventures such as this be crushed by licensing and legal fees. We have enough of that already in the MMORPG space via self-destructing crowdfunding efforts that never produce.
There's an Open Gaming License and SRD for most of the rules of 5e; as long as you don't use Wizard specific IP (Beholders, Illithids I believe, any class path) generally you'll be okay. I can't promise it of course, but I would think if I'm aware how to do it properly, they would too.
TSR, and later Wizards of the Coast, had a history of being quick to threaten legal action. (Hasbro, maybe not so much). I can't easily dismiss the notion that they won't revert to their prior behavior.
So I stream DND stuff well when I can find people for six hours of d20 lol...
You don't mention DND. You don't say DND.
You don't mention 5th edition etc.
They can't do jack otherwise. Now if you don't care about monetizing then who cares. They can't do much if you aren't earning on it.
So many animated dnd shows are out there that do the same thing.
Imagine stealing an idea from a dude who was referencing his time at war....putting dice to it and then telling your users "You can't do anything with this". Lol fine bro I'm not playing DND
Just an FYI, since there seems to be a general misconception, the Twin Drums team has stated the combat is not DnD 5E derived. They just have two products: 1) a 5E sourcebook for the setting (available for signing up to their email list, or originally by being a Kickstarter backer); 2) a UO (and maybe a little Eve) inspired MMORPG (without the direct PVP).
So very skill-based, not clear what if any quest story arcs will exist. Based on the lore, I get the sense of lots of parallel servers of moderate size (bigger than Book of Travels, but I get the sense they are looking at hundreds per server, not thousands, but that is pure speculation).
Combat not derived from 5E D&D, even though all the classes in this game seem to be "inspired by" 5E D&D, according to devs in their discord. Their website mentions the game is/will be totally playable in a pen and paper setting. Have a read through that lorebook and you'll notice the classes are very "heavily inspired." cough plagiarized cough. They're offering up old tea in a different cup and telling us it's a fresh new flavor.
So you are conflating the tabletop setting with the MMORPG.
tabletop: 5e-based game, with classes relabeled to be consistent with the settings. The lore book only related to the game because the lore is shared.
MMORPG: Crafting, turn based PVE. From what I’ve gathered from posts and discord comments, they want to focus on a variation of territory control via their form of guilds, by collecting items from creatures and “spirits” that allow for group-wide expansion/protection/upkeep. Only the team knows for sure if there are classes, but they talked a lot about something more similar to the UO/Eve style skill tree paradigm. Allan, the head of the team, has mentioned in a few interviews that their RP-focus came from his times playing on UO private servers.
Let me put it to you this way. They already have implemented an in-game authentic African board game to play (I believe it is like Mancala). The idea being is players can RP over it. Has strong UO vibes in this way.
one of the reasons I backed was they had enough to the source book written that even if the MMO never happens, I had a book of interesting ideas in a non-western fantasy setting.
So again, the tabletop game, with the rules in the lore book is not how the MMORPG was originally proposed as. They are barely in alpha, so it may change (if they ever even release).
The grid == DND seems a supremely huge assumption on your part. When I see a grid, I think Civ, Syndicate, Gold Box Pool of Radiance (yes, dnd!), or archon. Also SimCity. :shrug:
Maybe it’s just because the vast majority of playing DnD was “theater of the mind” and not minis.
You can't attribute classes and leveling to just DnD, that was followed by umpteen role playing table-top games. It is not as if skill based for example never had a look in, it did just not do as well. But I would really like to see some of the more interesting RPG takes on a rules system given a go.
I 100% attribute classes and leveling to DnD, since they were the first to do it. The umpteen role-playing tabletop games are unmentionable because they were mostly just copies of DnD or so far from the genre that you can't really compare them. World of Darkness has some of the most creative writing and lore I've ever read, but the game itself is just a sea of d10s and focuses more on role-playing than gameplay mechanics. I will agree with you on wanting to see some more interesting takes on RPG rule systems.
That's like saying 'I blame Blizzard for the way MMOs all started to use WoW's template, the studios who followed suit are blameless". To me, back in the day studios looked to tabletop for ideas on RPG rules and nearly all they saw was a sea of classes and levels, so I can't just pin this one on DnD.
Whats your favourite MMORPG and solo RPG just based on the rules system? I am quite loose with solo RPG's, just give me a good game and I don't care if I am in a class or whatever. When it comes to MMORPG's I take a more holistic approach, classes and levels do the job but can we do better? There is the skills approach but I think that does not change the game as much as its supporters would have us believe. Then there is the idea of having levels but making them relatively meaningless like in ESO where the zone matches you to its "level". Classes and levels are tried and trusted, the genre will need something as solidly based to move on from them.
When it comes to MMORPG's I take a more holistic approach, classes and levels do the job but can we do better? There is the skills approach but I think that does not change the game as much as its supporters would have us believe. Then there is the idea of having levels but making them relatively meaningless like in ESO where the zone matches you to its "level". Classes and levels are tried and trusted, the genre will need something as solidly based to move on from them.
Skill levels are essentially the same as character levels, just more fine-grained (which I do like). I dislike classes - too restrictive. I like how skill-based systems make it easier to get rid of them.
Classes do lead to role though, which is both restrictive and definitive; they make for easier assessment of a teams capabilities for grouping. You can go half way, Rift had generic classes which you could move around within. So Warrior has everything from Beastmaster to Warlord which you can freely (can't remember now how often you can switch) move between.
You could have classes which were only for PvP and skills for the rest of the game, plenty of ways to mix it up. That kind of system does take more work though.
Another poster mentioned is DnD a good fit for a MMO, well due to the brand and open (ish) license it is very tempting for game designers. Personally I do not see it as a good fit outside of the DnD world.
DnD is the All-Father of MMORPGs, I'm not sure if the genre could even exist without it. If game devs are doing an exact copy and paste of all gameplay mechanics from DnD then it probably won't be very good, and that goes for anything getting that kind of copy and paste inspiration. Games like WoW (back in 2004) played on that ruleset and gave us their unique take on it. I don't mind if I see the same classes or similar lore, but once players have the exact same capabilities as a game that already exists; I just don't get the point.
I've had blast for years in MMO's that had nothing to do with DnD. CoH, Ryzom, and PoTBS are great games, and are still being played today.
So in CoH, Ryzom, PoTBS; you never levelled up or picked a class? DnD; All-Father of MMORPGs.
Ryzom doesn't have classes, and your character doesn't have a level. PoTBS is based on naval warfare. I've played plenty of war-games with tanks, range, melee "classes", long before DnD.
Warships had "classes" as far back as 200 years ago.
Another poster mentioned is DnD a good fit for a MMO, well due to the brand and open (ish) license it is very tempting for game designers. Personally I do not see it as a good fit outside of the DnD world.
DnD is the All-Father of MMORPGs, I'm not sure if the genre could even exist without it. If game devs are doing an exact copy and paste of all gameplay mechanics from DnD then it probably won't be very good, and that goes for anything getting that kind of copy and paste inspiration. Games like WoW (back in 2004) played on that ruleset and gave us their unique take on it. I don't mind if I see the same classes or similar lore, but once players have the exact same capabilities as a game that already exists; I just don't get the point.
I've had blast for years in MMO's that had nothing to do with DnD. CoH, Ryzom, and PoTBS are great games, and are still being played today.
So in CoH, Ryzom, PoTBS; you never levelled up or picked a class? DnD; All-Father of MMORPGs.
Ryzom doesn't have classes, and your character doesn't have a level. PoTBS is based on naval warfare. I've played plenty of war-games with tanks, range, melee "classes", long before DnD.
Warships had "classes" as far back as 200 years ago.
What did you play? Risk? I mean Battleship didn't even come out until like 5 years after D&D. Real life warships huh? The comparisons you're trying to make are cute and all but don't even come close to making a real point. It kinda seems like you're disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing, not to be confused with trolling!! Disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing has been around long before trolling.
I played Avalon Hill wargames in the 60's and 70's. Jutland was one of my favorites. It didn't have a board, it was played to scale. It took an entire backyard to play it. And of course, warships have many different classes, even today. Jutland came out in 1967.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
But there are and were many games, even MMO's, that had and have nothing to do with DnD. Ryzom is a good example. PoTBS is another.
Just for fun, I looked up "Battleship", and it goes back to 1890. People were playing it in WWI. The first official game was Salvo, in 1931. That was before DnD, right?
For more fun, I looked up the history of DnD. It was based on earlier war games, like the ones I played.
I played Avalon Hill wargames in the 60's and 70's. Jutland was one of my favorites. It didn't have a board, it was played to scale. It took an entire backyard to play it. And of course, warships have many different classes, even today. Jutland came out in 1967.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
But there are and were many games, even MMO's, that had and have nothing to do with DnD. Ryzom is a good example. PoTBS is another.
Just for fun, I looked up "Battleship", and it goes back to 1890. People were playing it in WWI. The first official game was Salvo, in 1931. That was before DnD, right?
This is like saying: "anything with categories that behave differently" had classes before D&D. Too reductionist for my liking.
You could probably tighten the requirement by saying "classes" as a template for character/avatar skills, role and progression.
Actually, the word "class" is used in naval terms. It denotes a combination of armor and firepower, with some extra abilities. just like in RPG games.
For example: "Iowa class" tells you all you need to know about the ship. Just like "Mage" class tells you about a character.
If you say "class" can only be used in the context of a DnD game, then sure, classes belong to DnD.
I always think that saying this set of rules destroyed freedom and made other games the same a bit misleading. There are so many types of games out there and I enjoy the fact that we can pick and choose which type of game suits us.
Popularity does not mean other types of play styles cannot thrive. It is true that Everquest enjoyed popularity because it was the first 3d game but if other games also managed to gain players and left a footprint in our selection it is simply wonderful.
I loved Everquest I enjoyed the class restrictions because it defined your role and it was very restrictive and it made grouping in many cases a necessity and certain classes absolutely mandatory. Of course there are downsides and other people will point out other games like UO and AC that did things differently.
There's no need to fault a game or set of rules and that it categorically changed everything. It might have but I think that is not the fault of the game or rules. It simply means certain style of game suits more people and it therefore gains popularity and more games of a similar sort are made. That could cripple or hamper other styles because other developers want similar success see WoW for reference.
Things are changing now though as the game space is expanding with Indie games. It just take one success for more of that type to flourish like the Survival genre. As players we should embrace the games and try to support them so that we might see more innovation in our lifetime.
I am always up to trying something new as long as it does not rely on first person (nausea for me) or PvP which I am not a fan of.
I played Avalon Hill wargames in the 60's and 70's. Jutland was one of my favorites. It didn't have a board, it was played to scale. It took an entire backyard to play it. And of course, warships have many different classes, even today. Jutland came out in 1967.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
But there are and were many games, even MMO's, that had and have nothing to do with DnD. Ryzom is a good example. PoTBS is another.
Just for fun, I looked up "Battleship", and it goes back to 1890. People were playing it in WWI. The first official game was Salvo, in 1931. That was before DnD, right?
This is like saying: "anything with categories that behave differently" had classes before D&D. Too reductionist for my liking.
You could probably tighten the requirement by saying "classes" as a template for character/avatar skills, role and progression.
Actually, the word "class" is used in naval terms. It denotes a combination of armor and firepower, with some extra abilities. just like in RPG games.
If you say "class" can only be used in the context of a DnD game, then sure, classes belong to DnD.
No I mean class as a template for skills, progression and role. I believe STO has something equivalent outside of a toon with its ships, which can perform roles and be upgraded. But I do not limit the concept to a DnD game.
So my point is that in PoTBS, for example, you play as a naval captain, in charge of a "class" of ship. That class describes what the purpose of the ship is, what it's capabilities are, etc. And it has nothing to do with DnD.
Since DnD came from wargame roots, I'd almost bet the use of "class" came from the prior naval use.
I played Avalon Hill wargames in the 60's and 70's. Jutland was one of my favorites. It didn't have a board, it was played to scale. It took an entire backyard to play it. And of course, warships have many different classes, even today. Jutland came out in 1967.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
But there are and were many games, even MMO's, that had and have nothing to do with DnD. Ryzom is a good example. PoTBS is another.
Just for fun, I looked up "Battleship", and it goes back to 1890. People were playing it in WWI. The first official game was Salvo, in 1931. That was before DnD, right?
This is like saying: "anything with categories that behave differently" had classes before D&D. Too reductionist for my liking.
You could probably tighten the requirement by saying "classes" as a template for character/avatar skills, role and progression.
Actually, the word "class" is used in naval terms. It denotes a combination of armor and firepower, with some extra abilities. just like in RPG games.
If you say "class" can only be used in the context of a DnD game, then sure, classes belong to DnD.
No I mean class as a template for skills, progression and role. I believe STO has something equivalent outside of a toon with its ships, which can perform roles and be upgraded. But I do not limit the concept to a DnD game.
So my point is that in PoTBS, for example, you play as a naval captain, in charge of a "class" of ship. That class describes what the purpose of the ship is, what it's capabilities are, etc. And it has nothing to do with DnD.
Since DnD came from wargame roots, I'd almost bet the use of "class" came from the prior naval use.
I am not fixating on the name, but its function. GW2 calls them professions for example but they function exactly the same. Did any game before DnD did the following?
- You play an "entity" (a character in D&D). - That entity has an immutable "descriptor" (class in D&D) that describes: - what skills or powers it has - how it progresses through play (leveling in D&D) - what role it has in a group
I think this is the essence of the "D&D class". I cannot think of a game that did this before.
Otherwise, chess fits what you had in mind and is way older than Battleship. But chess has no player groups, or progression.
- You play an "entity" (a character in D&D).
Yes, I will play as the New Mexico, a "New Mexico class" battleship
- That entity has an immutable "descriptor" (class in D&D) that describes:
- what skills or powers it has
New Mexico class has 14 inch main armament, 5 inch secondary, and 40mm and 20mm antiaircraft. It can go 26 mph.
- how it progresses through play (leveling in D&D)
The New Mexico went through many upgrades., or progressions. It had the cage masts replaced with better rangefinders (accuracy boost), and replaced the electric motors with steam turbines (speed and dex).
- what role it has in a group
Mostly functioned as a tank would in an RPG game today. Heavy armor and the ability to absorb damage. To protect the thin-skinned range damage dealers.
I played Avalon Hill wargames in the 60's and 70's. Jutland was one of my favorites. It didn't have a board, it was played to scale. It took an entire backyard to play it. And of course, warships have many different classes, even today. Jutland came out in 1967.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
But there are and were many games, even MMO's, that had and have nothing to do with DnD. Ryzom is a good example. PoTBS is another.
Just for fun, I looked up "Battleship", and it goes back to 1890. People were playing it in WWI. The first official game was Salvo, in 1931. That was before DnD, right?
This is like saying: "anything with categories that behave differently" had classes before D&D. Too reductionist for my liking.
You could probably tighten the requirement by saying "classes" as a template for character/avatar skills, role and progression.
Actually, the word "class" is used in naval terms. It denotes a combination of armor and firepower, with some extra abilities. just like in RPG games.
If you say "class" can only be used in the context of a DnD game, then sure, classes belong to DnD.
No I mean class as a template for skills, progression and role. I believe STO has something equivalent outside of a toon with its ships, which can perform roles and be upgraded. But I do not limit the concept to a DnD game.
So my point is that in PoTBS, for example, you play as a naval captain, in charge of a "class" of ship. That class describes what the purpose of the ship is, what it's capabilities are, etc. And it has nothing to do with DnD.
Since DnD came from wargame roots, I'd almost bet the use of "class" came from the prior naval use.
I am not fixating on the name, but its function. GW2 calls them professions for example but they function exactly the same. Did any game before DnD did the following?
- You play an "entity" (a character in D&D). - That entity has an immutable "descriptor" (class in D&D) that describes: - what skills or powers it has - how it progresses through play (leveling in D&D) - what role it has in a group
I think this is the essence of the "D&D class". I cannot think of a game that did this before.
Otherwise, chess fits what you had in mind and is way older than Battleship. But chess has no player groups, or progression.
- You play an "entity" (a character in D&D).
Yes, I will play as the New Mexico, a "New Mexico class" battleship
- That entity has an immutable "descriptor" (class in D&D) that describes:
- what skills or powers it has
New Mexico class has 14 inch main armament, 5 inch secondary, and 40mm and 20mm antiaircraft. It can go 26 mph.
- how it progresses through play (leveling in D&D)
The New Mexico went through many upgrades., or progressions. It had the cage masts replaced with better rangefinders (accuracy boost), and replaced the electric motors with steam turbines (speed and dex).
- what role it has in a group
Mostly functioned as a tank would in an RPG game today. Heavy armor and the ability to absorb damage. To protect the thin-skinned range damage dealers.
Yes, this fits what I had in mind.. Which game is this?
As I posted before, Jutland was one of my favorites. It was played in scale on the ground (using up a whole backyard). Jutland was WWI, so I should have picked the Lion or some other ship.
In PoTBS, I played mostly merchant classes, but the Mont Blanc Indiaman was one of my favorites. A 56 gun heavy ship comparable to a 4th rate class.
In PoTBS you play as a ship officer, who gradually gets promoted and can captain larger and larger ships. Just like in the real Navy. Each ship is a "class", which defines its characteristics.
My point is that the use of the word "class" to denote charactersitics, is far older than DnD.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
My post that you first quoted said that DnD is the All-Father of MMORPGs. You agree with me. My point is made and I don't have anything left to debate. I'll agree with you that DnD heavily draws on Tolkien's work.
And others. Moorcock, Vance, Howard, Burroughs, Zelazny. And mythology. Any mythology that described creatures was 'appropriated', often badly.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I played Avalon Hill wargames in the 60's and 70's. Jutland was one of my favorites. It didn't have a board, it was played to scale. It took an entire backyard to play it. And of course, warships have many different classes, even today. Jutland came out in 1967.
I agree that most MMORPG's are patterned after DnD, which is patterned after Tolkien.
But there are and were many games, even MMO's, that had and have nothing to do with DnD. Ryzom is a good example. PoTBS is another.
Just for fun, I looked up "Battleship", and it goes back to 1890. People were playing it in WWI. The first official game was Salvo, in 1931. That was before DnD, right?
This is like saying: "anything with categories that behave differently" had classes before D&D. Too reductionist for my liking.
You could probably tighten the requirement by saying "classes" as a template for character/avatar skills, role and progression.
Actually, the word "class" is used in naval terms. It denotes a combination of armor and firepower, with some extra abilities. just like in RPG games.
For example: "Iowa class" tells you all you need to know about the ship. Just like "Mage" class tells you about a character.
If you say "class" can only be used in the context of a DnD game, then sure, classes belong to DnD.
I think you are revealing some of the military wargaming origins of the DnD rules, often seen as the reason why DnD was a first step for roleplaying not the last.
Whats your favourite MMORPG and solo RPG just based on the rules system? I am quite loose with solo RPG's, just give me a good game and I don't care if I am in a class or whatever. When it comes to MMORPG's I take a more holistic approach, classes and levels do the job but can we do better? There is the skills approach but I think that does not change the game as much as its supporters would have us believe. Then there is the idea of having levels but making them relatively meaningless like in ESO where the zone matches you to its "level". Classes and levels are tried and trusted, the genre will need something as solidly based to move on from them.
I really enjoyed Wurm Online's skill system; rather than leveling up from killing things or having a combat level like runescape you have 3 main characteristic stats (body, mind, and soul with all of their own subskills like body stamina, mind logic, soul depth) so the more you mine ore or chop wood your body stats will progress with those skills and, ever so slowly, make you more powerful. A more refined version of this or even the same system in a different game would be a very refreshing take for me.
If that's too much...
Another take on Shadowbane's class-building and guild-warring would be more than satisfactory and refreshing. While I still think the game has some of the best character building of all time, a modernized engine and graphics would bring me back for years to come.
Or, if that's too much to ask for...
A game with progression and exploration similar to the early days of World of Warcraft, with perhaps a bit more freedom in the character building. I don't like a lot of newer MMORPGs where I can hit endgame in less than 1 day, and little things like not being able to disperse attribute points upon leveling have bothered me since the start. That being said, the game had some of the best dungeon-running and immersion I've ever experienced. To this day I still think the gameplay of Classic and TBC servers is enough to suffice and I may even be coerced by a friend to go back, but after playing the same content for 18 years now its difficult to find the same immersion that I used to.
I certainly agree with the third option, to me a hybrid between the best of old and new MMOs is the way forward. I am not convinced by either of the first two options but like you I am happy to see anything new being tried, the problem is that with so few new systems being tried "Modern WoW template" will never change. I was not in SB but some friends thought it was exceptional, to me PvP has to be distinct from PvE areas. Here DAOC nailed it in my eyes, separate zones for PvP.
Comments
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
So I stream DND stuff well when I can find people for six hours of d20 lol...
You don't mention DND. You don't say DND.
You don't mention 5th edition etc.
They can't do jack otherwise. Now if you don't care about monetizing then who cares. They can't do much if you aren't earning on it.
So many animated dnd shows are out there that do the same thing.
Imagine stealing an idea from a dude who was referencing his time at war....putting dice to it and then telling your users "You can't do anything with this". Lol fine bro I'm not playing DND
I'm playing Dragon Dungeons.
tabletop: 5e-based game, with classes relabeled to be consistent with the settings. The lore book only related to the game because the lore is shared.
MMORPG: Crafting, turn based PVE. From what I’ve gathered from posts and discord comments, they want to focus on a variation of territory control via their form of guilds, by collecting items from creatures and “spirits” that allow for group-wide expansion/protection/upkeep. Only the team knows for sure if there are classes, but they talked a lot about something more similar to the UO/Eve style skill tree paradigm. Allan, the head of the team, has mentioned in a few interviews that their RP-focus came from his times playing on UO private servers.
Let me put it to you this way. They already have implemented an in-game authentic African board game to play (I believe it is like Mancala). The idea being is players can RP over it. Has strong UO vibes in this way.
one of the reasons I backed was they had enough to the source book written that even if the MMO never happens, I had a book of interesting ideas in a non-western fantasy setting.
So again, the tabletop game, with the rules in the lore book is not how the MMORPG was originally proposed as. They are barely in alpha, so it may change (if they ever even release).
Maybe it’s just because the vast majority of playing DnD was “theater of the mind” and not minis.
Whats your favourite MMORPG and solo RPG just based on the rules system? I am quite loose with solo RPG's, just give me a good game and I don't care if I am in a class or whatever. When it comes to MMORPG's I take a more holistic approach, classes and levels do the job but can we do better? There is the skills approach but I think that does not change the game as much as its supporters would have us believe. Then there is the idea of having levels but making them relatively meaningless like in ESO where the zone matches you to its "level". Classes and levels are tried and trusted, the genre will need something as solidly based to move on from them.
You could have classes which were only for PvP and skills for the rest of the game, plenty of ways to mix it up. That kind of system does take more work though.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
Popularity does not mean other types of play styles cannot thrive. It is true that Everquest enjoyed popularity because it was the first 3d game but if other games also managed to gain players and left a footprint in our selection it is simply wonderful.
I loved Everquest I enjoyed the class restrictions because it defined your role and it was very restrictive and it made grouping in many cases a necessity and certain classes absolutely mandatory. Of course there are downsides and other people will point out other games like UO and AC that did things differently.
There's no need to fault a game or set of rules and that it categorically changed everything. It might have but I think that is not the fault of the game or rules. It simply means certain style of game suits more people and it therefore gains popularity and more games of a similar sort are made. That could cripple or hamper other styles because other developers want similar success see WoW for reference.
Things are changing now though as the game space is expanding with Indie games. It just take one success for more of that type to flourish like the Survival genre. As players we should embrace the games and try to support them so that we might see more innovation in our lifetime.
I am always up to trying something new as long as it does not rely on first person (nausea for me) or PvP which I am not a fan of.
Best of luck to this game.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.