Monte Cook IS working on 5th edition...

[Stubbazubba]

For me, I believe that players want to influence the world, and more importantly have the world influence them back. If you save the orphanage, you expect to hear when they're having a talent show, or you're invited to a celebratory party in your honour.

Guild Wars 2 is kind of talking big about having stuff happen in this direction. Villagers are supposed to recognize PCs that participated in their 'dynamic events' system which trigger off other events in the 'event chain.' So if you save the villagers from the centaur invasion, the centaurs regroup and a new mission becomes available to route them from their base in the hills (before they get a chance to come back and attack the village again), and the villagers will thank you when you talk to them. Shopkeepers might give you discounts, and such, if I recall. Anyways, a lot of talk so far, it's yet to be seen, but if nothing else they're trying to address the problem and move the genre in that direction.

[hogarth]

When the orc hits your nearest adventurer, they doesn't take "no damage", and then proceeds to have their armour shed like a torn suit.

Was this sentence translated by computer or something?

[Previn]

Guild Wars 2 is kind of talking big about having stuff happen in this direction. Villagers are supposed to recognize PCs that participated in their 'dynamic events' system which trigger off other events in the 'event chain.' So if you save the villagers from the centaur invasion, the centaurs regroup and a new mission becomes available to route them from their base in the hills (before they get a chance to come back and attack the village again), and the villagers will thank you when you talk to them. Shopkeepers might give you discounts, and such, if I recall. Anyways, a lot of talk so far, it's yet to be seen, but if nothing else they're trying to address the problem and move the genre in that direction.

You've got a lot of this in WoW. Reputation changes how NPCs interact with you (from attacking you on sight to giving you discounts or only selling to you if you have a high enough rep) and how well the reconginize you in greetings, 'phasing' allows you to see changes in the world based on what you do (or don't do) and there are some quests that branch and have you choose one side or another, and numerous times NPCs will mail you with a thank you mail after the fact a day or two later.

I do have high hopes for GW2.

While you can't do something like murder an NPC and expect them to stay dead (most of the time), that's not even really a technical limitation so much as a design on with Blizzard preventing a couple jerks from ruining the game by running around and assassinating every NPC in a city. Technically speaking it would be pretty trivial to spawn a random name/apperance NPC.

[Swordslinger]

It is not hard to roleplay the exact same characters in WoW as you would in a TTRPG that had WoW's same setting and plot. You do have to suspend your disbelief as regards to a few things, like the fact that yes, you can in fact go and kill every single raid boss as many times as you want.

That totally kills it for me. The fact that killing a raid boss means nothing ultimately removes any potential connection you might have with the game world. If I kill Longtooth the ogre, I want Longtooth to be dead. I don't want the gameworld to just flip me off and go on as if my actions and choices never happened.

I also want NPCs to interact with. And that goes beyond just getting quests, bartering with shopkeepers and stabbing things.

[Previn]

That totally kills it for me. The fact that killing a raid boss means nothing ultimately removes any potential connection you might have with the game world. If I kill Longtooth the ogre, I want Longtooth to be dead. I don't want the gameworld to just flip me off and go on as if my actions and choices never happened.

Depending on the NPC, this does actually happen. Do raid bosses stay dead? No, but while that may "ultimately remove any potential connection" for you personally it doesn't for literally millions of other people. There's also nothing saying you ever have to kill a raid boss more than once, or at all ever. In WoW there are also times where you kill a boss (though not raid bosses) that does change things for you immediately, and that you can never go back and do again. Heck, I'd like to see you set your hearthstone in Southshore now....

Honestly when you complain about Longtooth the ogre not being dead because you killed him in an MMO, it's akin to asking everyone who ever plays the adventure "Longtooth the Ogre and the Magical Plate of Spaghetti" to have Longtooth be dead because you killed him.

I also want NPCs to interact with. And that goes beyond just getting quests, bartering with shopkeepers and stabbing things.

You have NPCs that help you fight, that drive you around or you drive around, that you have to rescue or escort, or heal, you have NPCs that teach you the secrets of fishing, or kick you from one continent to the next, or tell you stories, NPCs that preform rituals you can interrupt or ignore, NPCs you can pickpocket, NPCs you can trick into do things for you, should I go on?

Do you get the full range of social interaction from CPU NPCs? No, that's really beyond the technical ability right now, but you clearly have no idea what the heck you're talking about when it comes to MMOs.

[Swordslinger]

Depending on the NPC, this does actually happen. Do raid bosses stay dead? No, but while that may "ultimately remove any potential connection" for you personally it doesn't for literally millions of other people.

Sure, but there are a great deal of people who like MMORPGs that do not like TTRPGs and vice versa.

The experiences of the two are very different.

You have NPCs that help you fight, that drive you around or you drive around, that you have to rescue or escort, or heal, you have NPCs that teach you the secrets of fishing, or kick you from one continent to the next, or tell you stories, NPCs that preform rituals you can interrupt or ignore, NPCs you can pickpocket, NPCs you can trick into do things for you, should I go on?

And their interactions are basically boring and simple. Can you marry the elf maiden you just rescued? Can you ever get to the point where you can replace the lord of a given keep and rule it yourself? Can you ever become guildmaster of the mages guild?

I realize there are technical limitations, but other games brought some NPCs to life a lot better than MMORPGs do. Mass Effect and Baldur's gate II both had NPCs that had random conversations, bickered among each other, let you have romances and so forth. I would say games like that come much close to TTRPGs than MMORPGs ever will. It's those little things that make a game really come alive for me. In MMORPGs, the NPCs are just cardboard cut outs and it's pretty much FPS diablo.

I'm not saying people can't enjoy those kinds of games, it's just a vastly different experience than playing tabletop (at least if you ever did anything more than pure dungeon crawl).

[Previn]

And their interactions are basically boring and simple. Can you marry the elf maiden you just rescued? Can you ever get to the point where you can replace the lord of a given keep and rule it yourself? Can you ever become guildmaster of the mages guild?

Incidentally I'm the Guild Master of my guild, and we once held Shadowprey Village as our own personal fiefdom for a week before the horde finally came and kicked us out. I didn't get to have a romance with a computer controlled NPC, but I did have a light hearted rp romance, and I met my wife through WoW.

I realize there are technical limitations, but other games brought some NPCs to life a lot better than MMORPGs do. Mass Effect and Baldur's gate II both had NPCs that had random conversations, bickered among each other, let you have romances and so forth.

WoW NPCs do have random conversations and bicker among each other. They also run around and cast spells on other NPCs, critters and occasionally players at random, discuss their research and demonstrate spells, heal other NPCs, buff players and NPCs, wander around selling goods, attack random mobs as they patrol the countryside (and players if you wander to close) and numerous other things.

They don't let you have romances, but I've attended an RP wedding in WoW that had over 100 people in attendance (I turned down 100 gold to run through it naked claiming to be a baby's daddy). I've also been at a player held trial that was over 160 players, and ended with a 'surprise' assassination of one of the players. The Gates of An'quar opening hand almost 2000 players on my server at it.

I would say games like that come much close to TTRPGs than MMORPGs ever will. It's those little things that make a game really come alive for me. In MMORPGs, the NPCs are just cardboard cut outs and it's pretty much FPS diablo.

I'm not saying people can't enjoy those kinds of games, it's just a vastly different experience than playing tabletop (at least if you ever did anything more than pure dungeon crawl).

At this point think whatever you want, I'm done pointing out how you're wrong over and over again. You're an idiot, I'm out.

[Chamomile]

It is not hard to roleplay the exact same characters in WoW as you would in a TTRPG that had WoW's same setting and plot. You do have to suspend your disbelief as regards to a few things, like the fact that yes, you can in fact go and kill every single raid boss as many times as you want.

That totally kills it for me.

Then your imagination sucks. When you go kill Captain Evil in Captain Evil's Dungeon of Malevolency and then you come back out and the townspeople all tell you how awesome you are for having done so, and there's no mechanical incentive to ever go into that dungeon again, it is pitiably easy to suspend your disbelief and believe the quest ATM when he tells you that Captain Evil will never again threaten Blandshire, whether or not there happens to be an option to go back and do your favorite raids over again at some point. So long as you're not actually required to go back into that dungeon, it's pretty easy to assume that it's clear whenever you walk past the entrance.

As for wandering mobs, D&D characters don't usually hunt all monsters to extinction anyway. There might be something totally offscreen about how Sir Fighter McStabs trained a bunch of townsmen to go and hunt down all the monsters, thus ushering in a new age of peace and prosperity, but that's epilogue stuff anyway. You wouldn't do it during the main campaign under most circumstances, and it's a fairly small number of people who'd want to tell that story anyway.

[Swordslinger]

Then your imagination sucks. When you go kill Captain Evil in Captain Evil's Dungeon of Malevolency and then you come back out and the townspeople all tell you how awesome you are for having done so, and there's no mechanical incentive to ever go into that dungeon again, it is pitiably easy to suspend your disbelief and believe the quest ATM when he tells you that Captain Evil will never again threaten Blandshire, whether or not there happens to be an option to go back and do your favorite raids over again at some point. So long as you're not actually required to go back into that dungeon, it's pretty easy to assume that it's clear whenever you walk past the entrance.

Only it's seriously not clear, because there are still monsters wandering around outside it. I don't really know how you pretend it's not clear when a gnoll is stabbing me in the face literally 5 minutes after I supposedly cleared it.

And dude, no, I can't just imagination that away, because I know the reality of it is that I did absolutely nothing besides gain more XP and magic items. How am I supposed to get immersed in that world? Sure, the game might be fun and I could play it for gameplay and not story, but that's not to say that I'm ever going to feel part of the world or the story.

The fact is that is that my character isn't a real hero. He didn't save anyone, because nobody was ever at risk. Nobody thinks the guy is special for the deeds he accomplished because thousands of others did the same thing. King Arthur isn't special if 25,000 other dudes also pulled the sword from the stone. And yeah, I just can't feel anything remarkable about my character. You character really does not have a story, because nobody will ever agree on it. In the minds of the other PCs, they pulled the sword from the stone, not you. In the minds of the NPCs, they treat everyone like the dude that pulled the sword from the stone.

There's no coherent narrative at all, because nobody's story matches up. The only people that actually create real story are the NPCs and the game designers. The rest of what PCs do is irrelevant.

About the only online game that I've really seen that has any kind of permanency is EVE, where at least if you win a big space battle, you can blow up player space stations, take over territory and what not. Though I still wouldn't really say it gives much of a roleplaying experience, it's really more like a cooperative strategy type game, but at the very least, you feel like you accomplished something.

[ModelCitizen]

In Which Monte Spouts GNS Bullshit

Goddammit.

[violence in the media]

Swordslinger, I don't understand how your complaint isn't applicable to every TTRPG game, other than the fact that you aren't confronted with those other players constantly. Do you have a similar beef with the RPGA? I guess there's no satisfaction to killing Orcus in your games, due to knowing that thousands of other people have done the exact same thing and will tell you about it at length if given the opportunity? How are Baldur's Gate II and Mass Effect any different? You know there are people out there that have done everything you've done in those games as well.

[sarcasm]I mean, clearly my 12th level Paladin is so much cooler than yours. Plus, he's the real hero because we handled our quests aginst the orcs/mind-flayers/dragons/vampire queen so much better than your group did. And my awesome roleplaying totally turned a succubus/drow priestess/B'thusian demon whore to the side of good.[/sarcasm]

[Lago PARANOIA]

Swordslinger, I don't understand how your complaint isn't applicable to every TTRPG game, other than the fact that you aren't confronted with those other players constantly. Do you have a similar beef with the RPGA? I guess there's no satisfaction to killing Orcus in your games, due to knowing that thousands of other people have done the exact same thing and will tell you about it at length if given the opportunity? How are Baldur's Gate II and Mass Effect any different? You know there are people out there that have done everything you've done in those games as well.

I actually feel Swordslinger on this. If you're playing LFR or RPGA you're doing so because you want to have the feeling of existing in a shared world where your stories can be written by other people. If I get into a sword duel with Drizz't and win I think that it'd be more fun for it to impact everyone else's stories. I mean, unless there's a sense of shared story and community the events are pretty much pointless. You're going to have to do something to keep the size manageable and prevent blatant assholery, but, that's the general idea.

If another group can just retcon or ignore the story about how my group killed Orcus, why are we even playing in a shared universe? Why can't I just get a group of my buddies and have the setting as my oyster, ignoring anything that our group doesn't like? I mean, that's the default state of TTRPGs, so what the hell?

[violence in the media]

Previn and Chamomile already made the point that you can carve out your own private Idaho in MMOs if you want, and that's really no different than what you're proposing (and actually doing) as the default state of TTRPGs. No amount of swordery on your part in your game group is going to remove Drizz't from all future products for everyone else, so it seems odd to me to bring that up as a criticism specific to MMOs.

How many groups have run through the various famous modules or adventure paths over the years? Have you ever played in a group that ran multiple campaigns, either simultaneously or sequentially, with different MCs? How would you (or Swordslinger) feel if events in one campaign had no bearing whatsoever on any of the other campaigns, even if they were supposedly taking place in the same world?

This whole thing, at least to me, seems to boil down to an "ignorance [of other players doing nearly the same exact things] is bliss" argument. I genuinely don't understand how killing Illidan Stormrage in WoW is significantly different from killing Orcus at your table from a sense of accomplishment standpoint.

[tzor]

I'm not sure how you can do a world influencing RPGA (convention) type scenario because the RPGA does rely on having multiple groups run through the same scenario.

It could be possible to arrange a net world campaign secnario where each group runs different scenarios that interact with each other. You could even parallel them in a RPGA type environment but your impacts would only propagate through your own small subnet of the campaign world.

[Lago PARANOIA]

No amount of swordery on your part in your game group is going to remove Drizz't from all future products for everyone else, so it seems odd to me to bring that up as a criticism specific to MMOs.

Look, I'm cool with a massive campaign putting a time limit for the story and just ending things and from then on either letting the setting lie fallow, doing a reboot, or even doing a direct sequel. But within the confines of that time frame your actions should be meaningful.

This isn't a big deal for regular TTRPG groups because resets and/or sequels happen all of the damn time. But me playing Forgotten Realms for the fifth time does not change the fact that we killed Cattie-Brie and Drizz't the third time and from then on until the story ended was about our group being hated murderers throughout Faerun for killing their light and hope.

If you're saying that you have a massive world which might have other adventurers in it, it's deeply insulting to retcon my killing of Drizz't because it'd derail other peoples' campaigns. If I'm playing the 2004 version of LFR and someone in table 10 kills Drizz't in his bed before I get to them, Drizz't should still fucking be dead when we head over to his house. Otherwise the whole idea of having a shared story becomes meaningless and pointless.

Does that mean that Drizz't should be removed from future products? No. Does this mean that people who aren't part of our roleplaying troupe (however big it may be) should get the chance to kill Drizz't? No. Does this mean that once we've run the adventure to kill Drizz't, we may never play in another campaign that has Drizz't in it? No. What it means is that while the campaign is lasting and while someone else is nominally supposed to be playing in the same world they are, Drizz't should just not spring back to life like a fucking MUD mobile for... reasons.

[Swordslinger]

Swordslinger, I don't understand how your complaint isn't applicable to every TTRPG game, other than the fact that you aren't confronted with those other players constantly. Do you have a similar beef with the RPGA? I guess there's no satisfaction to killing Orcus in your games, due to knowing that thousands of other people have done the exact same thing and will tell you about it at length if given the opportunity? How are Baldur's Gate II and Mass Effect any different? You know there are people out there that have done everything you've done in those games as well.

I don't particularly care about other D&D games or other people's games of Baldur's Gate, because that's an alternate universe and my PC does not even exist there. I'm fine with a MMO having multiple servers which all have separate characters and are in effect different alternate universes. However, on the server (or campaign) where my PC exists, what he does should matter to other players, because he's part of that fucking story.

If you're sharing a story/universe with someone else, you need some fucking continuity. Otherwise, what's the fucking point?

[hogarth]

In Which Monte Spouts GNS Bullshit

Goddammit.

I didn't have a problem with the (contentless) article except for this line:
"Perhaps the fact that individual players come up with their own justifications—their own nods to realism—is in fact the very strength of the concept."

Considering the pointless bickering that I've seen here over whether XYZ is dissociated or not dissociated -- which is based on, you guessed it, whether an individual player can come up with a justification for a particular rule -- I'd have to say no, many people don't think it's a strength.

[CapnTthePirateG]

Still waiting on actual design...dum dum de de dum...

[Chamomile]

No one's arguing that TTRPGs aren't more flexible in the ways you can alter the world, because obviously in an MMO there is always an extremely finite in that area, sometimes limited to just one, single plot you can follow (of course, sometimes you have a railroad GM, but we will assume the game is being run at least marginally competently).

But first off, yes, you still totally can affect the world around you, because subsequent dungeon runs are non-canon, just like all the times you die during a singleplayer video game, and secondly that is the only major difference between MMOs and TTRPGs, barring graphical spectacle and relative ease of access. As opposed to movies, novels, and everything else, which have quite a few more differences.

[ModelCitizen]

I didn't have a problem with the (contentless) article except for this line:
"Perhaps the fact that individual players come up with their own justifications—their own nods to realism—is in fact the very strength of the concept."

Considering the pointless bickering that I've seen here over whether XYZ is dissociated or not dissociated -- which is based on, you guessed it, whether an individual player can come up with a justification for a particular rule -- I'd have to say no, many people don't think it's a strength.

Yeah, I noticed that too. What worries me is GNS dog whistle about sacrificing "simulation" for "gameplay." We've heard that before from Heinsoo and Mearls. Sounds like Monte drank the koolaid.

[hyzmarca]

Previn and Chamomile already made the point that you can carve out your own private Idaho in MMOs if you want, and that's really no different than what you're proposing (and actually doing) as the default state of TTRPGs. No amount of swordery on your part in your game group is going to remove Drizz't from all future products for everyone else, so it seems odd to me to bring that up as a criticism specific to MMOs.

The difference, I do believe, is in where the boundaries of the world lie.

In a MMO, your world is your server. There are many servers. They are all very similar, but different.

The fact that people on the same server can kill the same boss over and over again potentially damages suspension of disbelief (unless there is a very good in-character justification for it). But you kind of have to do it that way, or just not have bosses at all, because you're server has thousands of subscribers who you want to milk for cash and it's no fun if the same five guys do all the cool stuff.

Still, it is possible to have events that only occur once per server and bosses that are permakilled. It's just not a wise business decision.

In a TTRPG your have a DM instead of a server who runs a campaign world that might have a half-dozen subscribers, more of the DM really stretches himself. You can literally have the same five guys do all the cool stuff in the world without hurting your subscription numbers.

[Krakatoa]

Yeah, I noticed that too. What worries me is GNS dog whistle about sacrificing "simulation" for "gameplay." We've heard that before from Heinsoo and Mearls. Sounds like Monte drank the koolaid.

Because God forbid they focus on making a game that's fun to play before considering if it fits without how the world of Faerun works in real life.

[Judging__Eagle]

When the orc hits your nearest adventurer, they doesn't take "no damage", and then proceeds to have their armour shed like a torn suit.

Was this sentence translated by computer or something?

You need to review your 80's Hard video games, because that's exactly how the Ghouls and Ghosts defence system worked.

If you're wearing armour, and your hit-box collides with an enemy's hit-box; congratulations, your armour has now jumped off of your body, and left you in your tighty whities.

[Kaelik]

JE, you are still an idiot.

When someone asks you if you used an online translator, it's because you have shitty grammar.

You have failed your verb conjugation test. We don't care if armor comes off or not.

[Username17]

JE, you are still an idiot.

When someone asks you if you used an online translator, it's because you have shitty grammar.

You have failed your verb conjugation test. We don't care if armor comes off or not.

Except actually it's just a pattern of hogarth being incredibly shit at parsing sentences. Yes, JE used "doesn't" instead of "don't", but it's still really obvious what he meant. In D&D, an attack is either negated by armor or not, and he was saying that in the game he was talking about armor is damaged when it was hit.

This is the internet and we all make grammatical errors. We recast sentences incompletely just before publishing them, and do so incompletely all the time. That's just something we have to live with. However, hogarth has a pattern going back many months of showing two completely compatible statements by the same person and laughing about how there is some sort of magical contradiction that apparently only he can see. I can only imagine that hogarth has an extremely limited theory of mind and interprets all sentences by everyone with a giant conclusion jumping trampoline that he stands next to. And so it is that someone making a typographical error that uses the wrong verb tense causes hogarth to lose his ability to continue reading.

I actually find the fascinating part that hogarth is so terrible at interpreting the points and intentions of others that he hits a stop error when someone uses the wrong verb tense on the word "do". That's actually really sad.

-Username17