What can Tabletop RPG's learn from MMO's?

[Aryxbez]

RPGs honestly do have a lot to learn from WoW.

if people want to talk about stuff you could take from WoW and use WELL, however, that'd be different.

..This probably deserves its own thread, but I'll write up a bit on this

So, it shall be! Here is some starting bits on the subject, albeit I want to expand the conversation beyond just WoW.

It's been said in the past, how 4th edition took the "Bad" ideas from MMO's, or how there's good ideas in MMO's that would be applicable to Tabletop RPG's. I'm quite curious as to what Tabletop RPG's could learn from MMO's, what these good ideas would be, and perhaps how Tabletop RPG's would be able to implement them.

As I said above, despite the above quotes came from a subject about WoW, I'm curious in regards to MMO's in general, and not just WoW (Guild Wars 2 is well designed, anything applicable to RPG's there?).

[sabs]

There are no good ideas in MMOs. Well except once.
Let people get nice gear

All of the other supposedly good ideas in mmo's.. actually come from ttrpgs.. or fail miserable when you're not doing them in a computer environment.

Fighting the lich boss 27 times, until you get it down perfect.. is not fun in a computer, and it owuld be stupid in a ttrpg

[AndreiChekov]

There is one thing. In most mmorpgs every class has spells.

[OgreBattle]

MULTICLASSING

Final Fantasy XI's multiclassing system. You have a main class, then a subclass that is = to [main class]/2. In XI though you had to level them separately, in tabletop it would just be automatic.


WORLD BUILDING

MMO's need a solidly well thought out and spaced world to work. As the years go on more and more content is added all over the world. so just looking at how they're laid out is a good starting point.

[Leress]

Bloody Hell, Lago had a thread about this some years ago.

http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=105359

[TheFlatline]

Considering that like 9 out of 10 MMOs are atrocious and end of failing within a few years...

I'd say that TT RPGs should use MMOs as a roadmap on how *not* to design a game.

[ishy]

Well the WoW lead designer is really good at blaming other people / games.

Hey GC - before you stated you wished racials had no gameplay effects. Any design reason that can't made so at this stage?

I think the biggest reason is that a lot of players expect racials to have (minor) gameplay effects. Blame D&D.

But is there anything specific you'd like to look at?
Like say class design, item design, economy, player interactivity etc?

[Koumei]

There aren't many MMORPGs out there that have any lasting power - mostly you get a pile of in-browser games (often as not using Flash) and awful grind-fests designed to microtransaction you to death. So you don't want to use those as models.

WoW possibly gives a few take-home messages like "Players don't have to be limited to Human, Elf, Dwarf, they're allowed to be interesting things" (granted, they made it "Boring usual crap" versus "the baddies, which are at least interesting in appearance", unless Minotaurs are Alliance?)

"Your character doesn't work? Just rebuild it when you're in town" was a great one that works really well for that type of game. In a tabletop game where people actually remember who you are, it depends how much you change - people notice when the gnome takes his mask off and was actually an orc all along.

FF13 had some good ideas that were already discussed.

Lineage apparently works based solely on being full of hot elf ladies. Which happens to mesh well with what I think tabletop games need more of, but it's not exactly a rules-design thing.

Ragnarok Online... has survived, but I can't name anything that makes it particularly special, to be honest.

[MGuy]

Koumei you mean FF14 right? Because 13 wasn't an MMO and was a steaming pile of fucking garbage. A pretty pile of fucking garbage but still garbage.

[Leress]

FF13 had some good ideas that were already discussed.

FF13 wasn't an MMO, 11 and 14 are ones.

[Koumei]

Whoops. Yeah, I meant FF11, with the sub-classing.

[Grek]

WoW possibly gives a few take-home messages like "Players don't have to be limited to Human, Elf, Dwarf, they're allowed to be interesting things" (granted, they made it "Boring usual crap" versus "the baddies, which are at least interesting in appearance", unless Minotaurs are Alliance?)

The two factions are:
Alliance: Human, Drow, Gnome, Wolfman, Dwarf and Draenei (Purple People with Hooves and Tentacles).
Horde: Orc, Troll, Undead, Minotaur, Elf & Goblin.
Both Sides: Panda Men.

[TheFlatline]

Apparently what we take away from MMOs is that we aren't taking particularly anything away from MMOs, including trivial knowledge.

[Fuchs]

One has to consider that MMOGs have specific design goals that lead to their gameplay. Games that require a subscription usually have various ways to make players waste time so that they keep playing, regularily adding content that renders old gear obsolete, for example, or that expands the level range. Often gear is made deliberatedly hard to get to add Status to it beyound the stats it provides.

The only thing pen and paper games can take from there is to add content regularily, such as splat books, settings and maybe adventures.

[OgreBattle]

This isn't so much 'learning' as it is 'neat thing to take', and it's not an MMO either, but let's just talk about any videogame with the apporpriate theme

Dragon's Dogma
the Mystic Knights in that game have a cool spell called "Cannon", where you conjure a ball of energy in one place. It's a magical machinegun that turns the power of melee attacks striking it into long ranged blasts. If enemies touch it though, they trigger a blast against themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM1IuZN2iy4
(go to the 1:10 mark to see it in action)
Allies can also fire the cannon. The power of the cannon is based on the strength of the attacks used to activate it, so a powerful melee guy with a strong weapon is best.

[Bihlbo]

Ogrebattle's point about world-building is a very good one, especially in how effortlessly players get to experience a crpg's world. In a ttrpg we have to get creative with descriptions and really know what we're doing when it comes to delivering the right amount of the right stuff to enable players to more deeply understand the differences between our world and the imaginary one. Many crpgs do a good job with player immersion in the game world, and there are a lot of good tips to be gleaned from them. I particularly like TES games for this, but mmo quests (you know, the stuff you try your best not to read) also achieve this. Lesson: As a GM, if the world matters to the game, get proactive about forcing its eccentricities on the players. They will not learn anything about the game unless you feed it to them, so make it a hearty feast.

There's a lot to be said for playing an rpg in a world with challenges that are level appropriate in one place and way out of your league in another. Whether it's a crpg or ttrpg, it seems sort of boring and artificial to work your way through a rather large expanse only ever encountering things that your party is capable of defeating. I think it adds a lot to a game to know there are places that are just beyond your capabilities, and you increase your risk by attempting them. In an MMO like EQ for instance, I remember being rather proud of traversing half the world as a level 14 monk just to enter a level 60 dungeon in order to get a piece of metal enchanted by the only player able to do so. I could have died if anything went wrong, and that is fun and exciting. I think introducing challenges to ttrpgs that are designed such that a direct assault is almost certain to fail is a great way to mix things up and make the players think about non-direct problem-solving (like, if there's a black dragon in the lake, you fly over it - you do not get on a boat unless you want to get killed). Lesson: Sometimes there's a dangerous place where people simply do not go. You might be a hero, but some of those places apply to you as well. Run your games with a much wider range of difficulties available to players and let them decide what is level-appropriate and what isn't.

Group synergies are really fun and rewarding. Some MMOs do this very well, even keying certain abilities to effects only ever produced by other classes. In a ttrpg one downside may come from one player acting as though his abilities inhibit the choices other players have in what they do. The character abilities need to get better when synergized, not depend entirely on the synergies, but synergies are a good thing. Lesson: Design your rpg with synergies. As players, look for them and exploit them for fun and friendship.

MMOs are good at player-driven role-playing. Yeah, it depends on who the other people are, but with friends or on servers with people who aim to RP MMOs are great at this, and it's because there's no GM. In a ttrpg the players are reacting to the world around them and generally in order to keep things moving everyone feels like this needs to continue. In an MMO things keep moving no matter what, so roleplaying doesn't feel like an interruption and it really makes the game a lot more fun. RPing in a ttrpg doesn't need to be as reactionary and could easily be something that players initiate themselves, as ways to flesh out characters and build relationships, taking time away from the adventuring - but I have rarely seen it done. For instance, the Pulp Fiction scene in the car about the hamburgers in France could have happened in an MMO between two players, but is almost guaranteed to not happen in a ttrpg because that car trip is the part you skip. Lesson: Don't run games with an iron fist when it comes to pacing. When playing, think about what conversations could lead to good character development and orchestrate those. Don't be afraid to drop the focus away from combat and "the adventure" for a while.

You should get good at playing your character. In an MMO you have lots of opportunities to become a better bard (or whathaveyou) because you kill a lot of things and find yourself in situations where you have to better cooperate with differently-skilled characters. In a ttprg you're playing characters who have every reason to drill maneuvers, come up with effective strategies, and use teamwork to totally own every encounter they have. But who does that? I brought it up with some players in a recent game and they looked like I was suggesting we all get circumcised with a sharp chili pepper. Players should go into a new campaign or a new character with the aim to get good at playing the combat game, because that is appropriate roleplaying for a character who risks their lives in combat. That's something that probably takes extra-session time or some talks with the other players about cool tricks they can try. In an MMO it's strange if this doesn't happen, but in a ttrpg it's strange if it does and that's just dumb. Lesson: Realize your character wants to not die and roleplay accordingly. Talk to other players about what works and doesn't. Become a tactical genius when it comes to your character's ability to win a fight.

[shadzar]

TTRPGs can learn nothing from MMOs they are as different as TTRPGs and a recipe book. sure you have eating in all three, but they serve different purposes.

you can't have the numbers of people in a TTRPG, there isnt enough room and the single person running it doesnt have as much time to do everything the computer can do at the speed it does it. LARP is about as close as you can get to MMO style play or the "Living" X things WotC does, but those arent even lose to MMOs just because a shitload of people are playing at the same time as they never fully interact.

TTRPG must be designed around a different format and for the number of players. the only thing to learn was done already before MMOs came out and they learned that it takes time for each player and each player has an amount of time to do their own thing via MUDs, AOHell NWN, etc; and that computer help speed up calculations of the enormous pile of numbers used in TTRPGs.

[Prak]

Flightpaths A lot of people came into RPGs through fantasy books such as LotR, and thus think games are 80+% walking. WoW still has a lot of walking at low levels, but the existence of people who make a living via "Manticore/Gryphon/Dire Bat Express" is a great idea. Granted, it's nothing special, and anyone could have thought of it, but it's still a good idea that more people should take.

Pets There's a reason why pokemon is so popular. There's a reason why Riddick picked up a pet alien jackal in Riddick. There's a reason druid is a popular class (beyond just some of the best spellcasting in D&D), but people feel gypped by the Ranger. People like having badass monsters fighting other monsters at their side. A badass monster at the side of an already badass character is exponentially more awesome than the single badass. In an actual roleplaying game (as opposed to mashing buttons in a fantasy computer game with a level up mechanic), pets also give an additional character hook. Hell, if nothing else, it's an extra attack when the player is tied up, sometimes literally. People like pets, and the fact that it was reasonably easy for anyone to get a level appropriate pet in WoW was a good thing.

[Leress]

Prak, those aren't things to learn from MMOs since they are already in TTRPGs.

[Bihlbo]

Yeah Leress, but crpgs do a good job of showing how effective they are at making a game fun. If you're looking for grit as specific as spells you just aren't very good at learning things.

[nockermensch]

It was my hope that the prevalence of MMOs helped people to realize that there are like three or four completely different game experiences that by a deficiency of language are all called "RPGs".

It was also my hope that TTRPG designers noticed that there are somethings that computers do better than any human and others that they can't do and will remain not doing for the foreseeable future and then focused their games at what humans are best. So far, not only this hasn't happened, but 4e showed that people are willing to degrade themselves to copy even the interface aspects of MMOs, like glowing arrows over the monster's heads (Marking) or hotkey bars.

[TheFlatline]

Flightpaths A lot of people came into RPGs through fantasy books such as LotR, and thus think games are 80+% walking. WoW still has a lot of walking at low levels, but the existence of people who make a living via "Manticore/Gryphon/Dire Bat Express" is a great idea. Granted, it's nothing special, and anyone could have thought of it, but it's still a good idea that more people should take.

Pets There's a reason why pokemon is so popular. There's a reason why Riddick picked up a pet alien jackal in Riddick. There's a reason druid is a popular class (beyond just some of the best spellcasting in D&D), but people feel gypped by the Ranger. People like having badass monsters fighting other monsters at their side. A badass monster at the side of an already badass character is exponentially more awesome than the single badass. In an actual roleplaying game (as opposed to mashing buttons in a fantasy computer game with a level up mechanic), pets also give an additional character hook. Hell, if nothing else, it's an extra attack when the player is tied up, sometimes literally. People like pets, and the fact that it was reasonably easy for anyone to get a level appropriate pet in WoW was a good thing.

Flightpaths-

It's called a fucking scene cut. Seriously. If you want the party to quickly get from Point A to Point B, you just... skip to that point. You don't need to set up an in-character continent wide mass transit system that is already, at least in D&D/High Fantasy tropes, already has a better solution: Teleport and gates.

But I reiterate. We don't roleplay which leg you put your pants on first, so why do we have to model the passage of travel granularly?

MMO flight paths came from the need to move players quickly and the requirement that time progressing at the same rate for all players. You can't "skip ahead". And then at a certain power level you just portal anyway and nevermind.

Then Guild Wars 2 said "Why the fuck bother with the scenery tours nobody ever looks at after the first time?" and created the fast travel system that is cheap and easy to use.

Pets: Badass pets are basically another PC. I'm not against them per se, but you either need to give up a lot of player capacity or give up a lot of pet capacity to not completely outclass matched power levels.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Look, if you're going to use the FFXI multi/subclass idea, you need to completely scrap the idea of having half-levels in another class.

The subclass needs to be its own unique class that doesn't resemble the main class at all. That is, a Wizard-subclass-Rogue is a noticeably different class from Rogue-subclass-Wizard.

Of course, the problem with combinational subclasses (as opposed to classplosion) is that it is that much more testing. You'll almost certainly want subclasses to not be as complex as main classes. For example, level 10 of a rogue main class would give you improved evasion, 5d6 sneak attack, uncanny dodge, trapfinding, and three rogue talents. Level 10 of a rogue subclass would give you harrying strike (enemies you strike with sneak attack take escalating defense and attack penalities), 2d6 sneak attack, one rogue talent from the main list and one rogue talent from a unique subclass list, and whirlwind or close combat shot.

[tussock]

http://www.psychologyofgames.com/

That guy writes about how modern computer games use the tools of psychiatry to help manipulate players into feeling good about continuing to play, and spending money on it and shit like that.

Immersion is his latest thing, but the archives include things like how endowment works (starting people at level 3 or 7 or whatever, and why that's popular, and basically why it should be core in D&D) the principle of big numbers (why they use N * 1,000 XP rather than "13 encounters" to level up in 3e for instance), and why the people who spend the most money on your games will like it more and talk it up (and how people mostly won't do that at all for free stuff).

That last one? People hated the shitty free chargen programs for 3e, and loved the shitty chargen programs they paid $10/month for in 4e. That's how people work.


But you can take all that and relate it back to the mechanics of D&D. So randomly found potions that get randomly destroyed over time are quite addictive and valued highly by players and potions you can buy in a shop with your dungeon-coins are basically a shit sandwich. Even though the latter is more "realistic" or whatever.

And that's what Tabletop can learn from MMOs, that even a really crap and shallow RPG with almost no response to player input can be made addictive with some psychiatry tricks. A game like tabletop D&D has vastly more potential to make people feel fulfilled with their activities if you make it addictive enough for them to turn up again next week and learn how to fit in with the group and play the game.

[Krakatoa]

Lesson: Sometimes there's a dangerous place where people simply do not go. You might be a hero, but some of those places apply to you as well. Run your games with a much wider range of difficulties available to players and let them decide what is level-appropriate and what isn't.

While in broad strokes that's a fair point, not all things are equal. The danger zones in an MMO are pre-built and automated and your character or party is incidental to the broader function of the servers. Death usually results in a not-so-steep penalty as well. In tabletop, an encounter that vastly outclasses your party, wipes them out, or is in some way otherwise ill advised, the game can turn into drudgery for all players involved. It's especially true in 3.X and Pathfinder where the CRs aren't actually that helpful when trying to figure how much a challenge rates.