Monte Cook IS working on 5th edition...

[Kaelik]

Frank. That was an extremely ironic post.

Nothing about what hogarth actually said indicates in any fashion that he didn't understand what JE meant. Just that he wondered why JE made such a fucking stupid sounding error.

Whether or not hogarth is an objectively terrible person is completely irrelevant to the issue that JE said something with incorrect grammar, and hogarth asked if he used a translator, and then JE thought he should repeat himself because even when it was made fun of he still couldn't detect his conjugation error.

I also detected the error, and ignored it, like I'm sure many people did, but that doesn't mean that hogarth couldn't understand what the sentence meant.

EDIT: There's also the issue where what he actually said is just a really dumb way of saying that your adventurer takes damage and then his armor comes off, because double negatives are still mostly useless, but I'm willing to ignore that, because it's possible that "no damage" is an important state qualifier, even though, given the context, I doubt it.

[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?

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.

If you think "they doesn't take no damage and then proceeds to do XYZ" is comprehensible grammar, consult your local English teacher.

[violence in the media]

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?

I think I know what the disconnect is now. In regular TTRPG, your character matters to the world by virtue of you showing up and sitting at the table. Defeating the evil overlord, saving the townsfolk, and marrying the prince(ss) is the point. Your character could be the most maladapted and incompetent buffoon, but they are still part of the main focus of the game. The fun is largely provided for you, depending on the strength of the MCs ability.

MMOs, on the other hand, require you to do something noteworthy in order for the world (the community of other players) to notice you and care. Going on quests and killing shit in that context isn't the point, it's a means to an end--sort of like going to your job. The face-stabbing can be entertaining, but beyond that you're expected to make your own fun. You build up levels and gear and play experience so that you can go win in the arena, score a server first, or troll the Alliance by sneaking into Stormwind and disrupting an RP wedding. Even then, if you want to be "known" you have to participate and interact with the other players, otherwise you're just a name in a log or "that dude that did that thing that one time." Maybe you're going the social interaction RP route, and join a guild to that end. You'll still need to stab monsters in the face in order to facilitate going to certain places.

So, your actions can matter in the context of the world--just not in the manner you're used to and not with the sort of certainty to which you're accustomed.

[RadiantPhoenix]

If you think "they doesn't take no damage and then proceeds to do XYZ" is comprehensible grammar, consult your local English teacher.

It's not correct, but it's certainly comprehensible.

[Swordslinger]

MMOs, on the other hand, require you to do something noteworthy in order for the world (the community of other players) to notice you and care. Going on quests and killing shit in that context isn't the point, it's a means to an end--sort of like going to your job. The face-stabbing can be entertaining, but beyond that you're expected to make your own fun. You build up levels and gear and play experience so that you can go win in the arena, score a server first, or troll the Alliance by sneaking into Stormwind and disrupting an RP wedding.

So all the quests where you're supposedly saving the world and defeating bad guys are meaningless drivel but your big claim to fame is crashing someone's wedding? That sounds incredibly lame.

What ever happened to being a hero of legend and having your claim to fame be that you killed the demon king, saved the land and married the princess? But instead, apparently I'm grinding to level 75 so I can perform pranks like a fratboy hooligan. I want an epic storyline not some childish antics.

That sounds nothing like the experience I get from a TTRPG. That sounds like the kind of experience I'd get from going out to a bar, getting wasted and running across campus in my underwear. Now I can very well understand how people might like that sort of experience, but I still don't think it's in a direct competition with TTRPGs.

[Whipstitch]

It's a novelty issue and frankly a lot of ttrpg gameplay is just as thankless, when it comes right down to it. In MMORPGs, killing instance bosses is as common place as an adventurer killing some grizzly pulled off the random encounter table. You're expected to be able to do it, just about everyone else has managed to do it and it sure as hell doesn't make you special. You end up with a small portion of the player base who cares about world or server firsts, but for the most part people just don't give a shit.

[ishy]

It is even worse in games like WoW though, where for example there was an interesting quest about exposing a dragon hiding near your king and then killing it. But later on they decided that players aren't awesome enough or whatever and the lore became that some random npc that nobody had ever seen killed that dragon.

So I guess basically the lore in wow is that you just imagined everything you did and nothing of the sort actually happens in the world.

[Finkin]

MMOs, on the other hand, require you to do something noteworthy in order for the world (the community of other players) to notice you and care. Going on quests and killing shit in that context isn't the point, it's a means to an end--sort of like going to your job. The face-stabbing can be entertaining, but beyond that you're expected to make your own fun. You build up levels and gear and play experience so that you can go win in the arena, score a server first, or troll the Alliance by sneaking into Stormwind and disrupting an RP wedding.

So all the quests where you're supposedly saving the world and defeating bad guys are meaningless drivel but your big claim to fame is crashing someone's wedding? That sounds incredibly lame.

What ever happened to being a hero of legend and having your claim to fame be that you killed the demon king, saved the land and married the princess? But instead, apparently I'm grinding to level 75 so I can perform pranks like a fratboy hooligan. I want an epic storyline not some childish antics.

That sounds nothing like the experience I get from a TTRPG. That sounds like the kind of experience I'd get from going out to a bar, getting wasted and running across campus in my underwear. Now I can very well understand how people might like that sort of experience, but I still don't think it's in a direct competition with TTRPGs.

If you can point out to me any one of your characters from any tabletop RPG game you have played that has somehow become so legendary that every other player in the hobby has heard of that character's awesomeness and the character's deeds and story have been added to the official canon that accompanies the game...then I will buy your argument. But unless you sat at a table with Gygax and have spells in the PHB named after your Wizard, your argument is shit.

Otherwise every character you have ever played in a tabletop RPG suffers from the same issues that you claim to have in MMOs: languishing in relative obscurity no matter what you claim to have accomplished. If anything in tabletop games this problem is magnified, because other than you and the 5 other dudes at your table, nobody knows or gives a fuck what your achievements are. In an MMO, dozens, perhaps hundreds of other players may know your character by reputation, or if you did something truly noteworthy and captured it on video, and posted it for all to see, thousands might know your name. See: WoW's Leeroy Jenkins, Indalamar, or MegaTF, and Stynkfyst the monk or Fansy the bard from Everquest.

[RadiantPhoenix]

So I guess basically the lore in wow is that you just imagined everything you did and nothing of the sort actually happens in the world.

That's... rather meta, isn't it?

[Whipstitch]

There's still storylines baked into WoW but after you "complete" it all the dead NPCs go back to what they were doing, which is pretty disassociative for obvious reasons. It's one of those areas where running a game world for thousands of people is clearly running at cross purposes to entertaining an individual or even few dozen people for extended periods of time. If you and a few friends went in and played an MMORPG with the attitude that you're all bound and determined to suspend disbelief and won't repeat quests or zones then then it would hold up a bit better, but that's manifestly not how the business model works and you'd still have awkward situations where you'd try and kill the bad guy only to find that BubbleOSeven the Belf Paladin is camping his spawn point for the daily.

[Winnah]

I think Monte must have been reading this forum. Or, maybe it's just a coincidence he started polling about the importance of realism/simulation/associated rules.

On another note, I've never played WoW. Angwe inspires me. If I ever lose my job and have 40 hours a week to spend online, I'm going to spend that time being a griefing arsehole. Or y'know, I'll do some push ups, run around the block and then find another job. Tough call.

[Previn]

It is even worse in games like WoW though, where for example there was an interesting quest about exposing a dragon hiding near your king and then killing it. But later on they decided that players aren't awesome enough or whatever and the lore became that some random npc that nobody had ever seen killed that dragon.

So I guess basically the lore in wow is that you just imagined everything you did and nothing of the sort actually happens in the world.

Yeah, you didn't solo Onyxia in Stormwind. You had a group and the NPCs helping you out. A lot of players actually just let Bolivar, a MAJOR NPC and his guards take them out without ever touching them.

Incidently, you can't do that questline anymore because the game world and story has moved past that point.

[ishy]

Uhmmm no you couldn't ever fight her in stormwind.
I was talking about in the lore I believe it was wrynn or something who killed her.

But that was just an example. Here another one:
resurrection makes no sense in the game either.

Why don't the ress every single person who died in the game?
In the past you could at least make the argument that it was there for players only or something but that went right out the window when in a quest a random npc you never cared about used it on her teacher another random npc you never interact with from thereon forth.

But it all boiles down to this for me:
You can't make any choices that affect your game in mmorpgs. While you can make meaningful choices in ttrpg. And you can call out your dm on his bullshit while you can't in mmorpgs.

[hogarth]

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.

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with metaphorically stating that a particular RPG in some way resembles a chess set, or a chemistry set, or a series of novels. So saying that an RPG is good or bad a simulating a particular genre shouldn't be verboten.

The reason "real" GNS Theory is stupid is because (a) it makes a bunch of unobvious assertions, (b) it uses its own idiosyncratic system of technical jargon that different people use to mean different things, and (c) even if you accept (a) and (b), the theory doesn't really help you make a better game.

[Finkin]

Uhmmm no you couldn't ever fight her in stormwind.
I was talking about in the lore I believe it was wrynn or something who killed her.

Yes, yes you could. It was actually a pretty cool event.

[Previn]

Uhmmm no you couldn't ever fight her in stormwind.
I was talking about in the lore I believe it was wrynn or something who killed her.

As pointed out YES YOU DID. In fact you couldn't actually go into Onyxia's Lair to fight and kill her originally without first having done that questline. We ran people through it in groups way back in the day.

But that was just an example. Here another one:
resurrection makes no sense in the game either.

Why don't the ress every single person who died in the game?
In the past you could at least make the argument that it was there for players only or something but that went right out the window when in a quest a random npc you never cared about used it on her teacher another random npc you never interact with from thereon forth.

Why don't you raise everyone in TTRPGs?

Apply whatever reasoning you want to it. Heck, maybe it's like D&D and they don't want to come back. The afterlife is usually made out to be a pretty swinging place. The fact that it works on players, if they accept it doesn't mean that it works all the time on everyone. You can't rez players of the opposing faction, you can't res NPCs without shennanigens, you can't rez warlock pets, though you can rez hunter pets. You can rez your current adventuring buddies, but the why isn't explained. You actually have several quests that deal with "why don't we just rez them?"

But it all boiles down to this for me:
You can't make any choices that affect your game in mmorpgs. While you can make meaningful choices in ttrpg. And you can call out your dm on his bullshit while you can't in mmorpgs.

I'll buy that once you can create a definition of 'meaningful choices' that everyone agrees on.

[Swordslinger]

If you can point out to me any one of your characters from any tabletop RPG game you have played that has somehow become so legendary that every other player in the hobby has heard of that character's awesomeness and the character's deeds and story have been added to the official canon that accompanies the game...then I will buy your argument. But unless you sat at a table with Gygax and have spells in the PHB named after your Wizard, your argument is shit.

The point isn't to gain fame in the real world, it's to have fame in the imaginary world. If you want to just make a character well known to real world people, you're better off just becoming an author.

The point is that NPCs and other PCs in your gaming world can acknowledge the stuff you've done and that your character has some respect.

I can definitely see the disconnect now. MMOers want to become some kind of internet celebrity where their reputation is less about their character, and more about them doing silly antics. Immersion is not a big deal, because they want fame in the metagame, not in the game itself. At no point do MMOers really consider their game seriously, it's more just a forum for fratboy pranks. MMOers want to be remembered as the dude that threw the biggest party, or the jackass that drew a giant monster train into the newbie zone.

TTRPGers are looking for an immersive world where their character can gain status inside that world. They want a storyline that's important, and a world that reacts to them. They want killing the villain to be a big deal, and have an impact on the game world.

And that's a pretty big difference. As I've been saying, the two games do not provide similar experiences at all. One offers a more epic storyline where you get to be the hero and save the city/world/whatever, the other is simply a graphical forum to goof off with your friends and laugh as a fire giant chases your naked elf character through a big city.

That only fortifies my belief that MMOs and TTRPGs don't fill the same need for people.

[ishy]

As pointed out YES YOU DID. In fact you couldn't actually go into Onyxia's Lair to fight and kill her originally without first having done that questline. We ran people through it in groups way back in the day.

Except that you can't fight her as alliance in SW, only her guards.

Why don't you raise everyone in TTRPGs?

Apply whatever reasoning you want to it. Heck, maybe it's like D&D and they don't want to come back. The afterlife is usually made out to be a pretty swinging place. The fact that it works on players, if they accept it doesn't mean that it works all the time on everyone. You can't rez players of the opposing faction, you can't res NPCs without shennanigens, you can't rez warlock pets, though you can rez hunter pets. You can rez your current adventuring buddies, but the why isn't explained. You actually have several quests that deal with "why don't we just rez them?"

In dnd it at costs money to ress people so people won't do it for every schmuck who dies, even if they can easily get money. Not to mention cast time and less people actually having access to ress spells.

And in wow you sometimes need npcs to be ressed to complete quests.
Hell there was a quest where you needed to be dead or kill yourself to be able to proceed.
And you can or at least could ress warlock pets.

And please point out any quest that deals with the "why don't we just rez them?". Would be interesting to read.

I'll buy that once you can create a definition of 'meaningful choices' that everyone agrees on.

Let me change it to this then: ttrpg allow me to make choices during a quest other than: following the exact railroad I'm supposed to or not doing it.

If for example I get a low lvl quest to catch a burglar there are a million things I can try to do to catch him in a ttrpg, while in a wow there would only be one set course of actions I can follow.

[tzor]

TTRPGers are looking for an immersive world where their character can gain status inside that world. They want a storyline that's important, and a world that reacts to them. They want killing the villain to be a big deal, and have an impact on the game world.

That leaves the problem unanswered ... how do you really accomplish this in a practical TTRP game. Unless you have a DM who can design epic campaigns on the fly or is one hell of a campaign kit basher, your characters are going to do things that the campaign writer has not anticipated or prepared for.

So the more you push to have your characters "have an impact on the game world" the more you force your DM to be a on the fly campaign writer or kit basher.

Thus to one extent the notions of "impact on game world" and "important story line" are fundamentally at odds with each other. THe great DM can juggle both of them, but not all DM's are great.

I think people are missing the major design feature in MMO's is that they are designed to be deja vu in that a "campaign module" can be reused again and again ad infinitum for every new player. This significantly saves on the design work; you only have to have designers work on new areas to explore, the existing ones are totally reusable ad nauseum.

In principle there is nothing preventing you from having a world where events are unique, and doing them forever sets up changes in the game. You end up with a lot of designing, and you face the problem that not all players play at the same time and for the same amount of time (although you can take that into consideration). Ironically this works better in combat games where you control armies and your influence is you nuke an opponent or NPC city to rubble, but it is still possible. (These game, ironically have no storyline whatsoever ... but PLAY NOW MY LORD.)

[Previn]

In dnd it at costs money to ress people so people won't do it for every schmuck who dies, even if they can easily get money. Not to mention cast time and less people actually having access to ress spells.

Actually, you can res people without money in D&D with ease. The monetary cost is also actually trivial if you want it to be because the wealth and economic systems in D&D are broken. So it comes down to "don't raise every schmuck who dies" which isn't unique to D&D and can be applied to WoW or basically any other example of cheap and easy rezzing.

Let me change it to this then: ttrpg allow me to make choices during a quest other than: following the exact railroad I'm supposed to or not doing it.

If for example I get a low lvl quest to catch a burglar there are a million things I can try to do to catch him in a ttrpg, while in a wow there would only be one set course of actions I can follow.

That's different from what I asked for, probably because you can't do what I asked. It's also 100% dependent on how much of a railroading jerk your DM is. Heck, we have a developer of 4e not allowing players to use a power on a door to break it down because he wanted them to use the ballista in the room.

If you get a low level quest to catch a burglar and you have a jerk DM that wants you to do by a roof top chase, you bet you panties you're going to be doing it by a rooftop chase.

You could say that a TTRPG gives you options of different ways to solve the problem, but the DM is the one who decides which method you use. Now replace TTRPG with WoW and DM with Developers.

[Whipstitch]

That only fortifies my belief that MMOs and TTRPGs don't fill the same need for people.

I'd agree, except your characterization is too harsh and binary since a lot of people play WoW just because they like collecting things or exploring game mechanics before moving on to the next title or yes, because they do care about stories and fantasy. The trains and fratboy pranks describe the actions of attention whores, but those people are far and away in the minority of MMO players. They're just really obvious because being really obvious is what being an attention whore is all about.

[Swordslinger]

That leaves the problem unanswered ... how do you really accomplish this in a practical TTRP game. Unless you have a DM who can design epic campaigns on the fly or is one hell of a campaign kit basher, your characters are going to do things that the campaign writer has not anticipated or prepared for.

Telling a continuous story isn't remarkably difficult for a TTRPG. Its hard for a MMO because you don't want the same people always being the heroes. I'm not sure why you think it'd be difficult. All it really requires is having the PCs do important stuff and then mentioning the effects of that later. Cities should change hands, dangerous areas now become safe, and so on.

So the more you push to have your characters "have an impact on the game world" the more you force your DM to be a on the fly campaign writer or kit basher.

Well most DMs don't bother to plan a full campaign in advance, instead they do it on an adventure to adventure basis. And that's fine, because it means next adventure can take into account what you did last adventure. That's a good thing.

Thus to one extent the notions of "impact on game world" and "important story line" are fundamentally at odds with each other. THe great DM can juggle both of them, but not all DM's are great.

I think you misunderstand what I mean when I say "story". I don't mean some kind of novel where the DM knows how it's going to end. I mean just an epic theme is enough, then see how the PCs revolve it. The basis of the overarching principle should be that changes are coming to your campaign world, and the PCs get a chance to fit in. Whether it's political revolts, monster invasions, whatever. But you should never have an ending written that you force on the PCs. Let them have an impact.

[Chamomile]

Swordslinger, there are MMOs that already do that kind of thing. They just aren't WoW.

[Stubbazubba]

If WotC really wants to take D&D digital, they should just make in-depth custom mission-building the norm. All they have to focus on is making really slick tools for that, and people will make their own content. Instanced worlds and quests could be run in real-time, then saved to a library of sorts so others could use it later. I would recommend a brief "official" game with an official setting and an official plot that is fully voiced-over, etc., etc., but that's only one campaign; DMs and players can generate their own content on the side way faster than a dev team could. Admittedly, this is not an MMO, it's more like a battle.net for D&D.

Alternatively, you could have a single, expansive setting, wherein DMs could design custom missions, etc., and only ones which become popular or are otherwise deemed worthy would be stapled into the official setting. I'm not as sure how well this one would work, but it would maintain the MMO aspect.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Swordslinger, I agree with your overall thrust, but how about putting it in another thread?

There's a disconnect here between roleplaying and telling a story and while they're very similar they're not identical. I think you're on the right track but need a thesis to harden the whole thing.

I do not see WoW or games like it in any way shape or form an environment conducive to roleplaying. I've played MMORPGs (especially Final Fantasy XI), TTRPGs, and freeform IRC chat rooms and I can appreciate the subtle differences between them. And while mediums like WoW are not anti-roleplaying they're about as pro-roleplaying as a set of DragonStrike modules. Actually they're even less conducive to roleplaying than that, because DragonStrike was theoretically prepared to let you kill Darkfyre with a clever Scooby Doo plan. The difference in roleplaying between a game of Monopoly and World of Warcraft is closer than the difference between World of Warcraft and most TTRPGs.