WoW and 4e - where's the beef?

[AllisterH]

I think the biggest similarity is HOW they present the information.

For example, even though ToB is a percusor to 4e, few people equate ToB with WoW (anime, that's an entirely different thing)

The format of how manoeuvers are presented more closely matches that of the typical D&D presentation. Small listing of class abilities than the manoeuvers/spells are all combined for the various classes into one big section in the back of the book.

4e's layout _IS_ how "class" information is presented in your typical computer guide nowadays. All of that class abilities including class specific talents/perks are moved under the same heading even if the powers are shared by different classes.

re: 4e powers vs typical MMO talents
I would say the biggest difference is that many of the powers of the martial power source involve damage + discrete movement + condition whereas in a MMO, it is more damage + time + condition

 

[jdrakeh]

I've played WoW and think the similarities to D&D are superficial, at best. Also, if D&D were really like WoW, table-top role playing wouldn't be a niche hobby.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'm confused, are you saying that 4E builds don't effect what roles a character can fill?

Classes in 4E have one (primary) role. (Of course most classes also have one or two secondary roles that depend on your build.)
Classes in WoW (AFAIK) have multiple roles they can fill, depending on how you build them.

 

[Rechan]

Classes in WoW (AFAIK) have multiple roles they can fill, depending on how you build them.

To explain the above point more fully:

Shamans have three Builds. They can be a Melee Damage Dealer, a Ranged Damage Dealer, or a Healer.
Druids have four builds. They can be a Tank, a Ranged Damage Dealer, a Melee Damage Dealer, or a Healer.

AFAIK, you almost have to focus on one of those. You CAN pick up your abilities in all of those, but you'd basically suck at everything because you're spreading yourself so thin, and could do nothing well enough to survive.

Whatever build you pick, that's what you do. That's all you do. You heal? That's all you do. You tank? That's all you do.

There is no "Secondary role".

 

[Fanaelialae]

To elaborate further:

In 4e, your role defines what you do best while your build focuses on how you do it. A Fighter is a Defender regardless of whether he is 1 or 2H Weapon Talent, Tempest, or Battlerager. Certainly some of these are a bit better at defense while others focus more on offense, but regardless of build a Fighter is an excellent defender.

In WoW, a Warrior (WoW's Fighter) has three talent trees. Protection focuses on tanking (defender), Fury focuses on offense (striker), and Arms focuses on PvP (no analog in 4e). (At least, that was what they did when I stopped playing; no idea what's changed since then.) A Fury Warrior can put out close to Rogue damage, but he usually won't survive grabbing a boss' attention any better than a Rogue (both are pretty squishy). Using a Fury Warrior to tank a boss is generally a last resort, and usually only works if the Fury Warrior is wearing full Prot gear (gear in WoW is of equal importance to Talents) and the party is over-geared/leveled. Using a Fury Warrior in Fury gear to tank is almost certainly doomed to failure for any non-trivial encounter.

So while there is some similarity, in practice they are quite different.

 

[malraux]

In WoW, a Warrior (WoW's Fighter) has three talent trees. Protection focuses on tanking (defender), Fury focuses on offense (striker), and Arms focuses on PvP (no analog in 4e). (At least, that was what they did when I stopped playing; no idea what's changed since then.) A Fury Warrior can put out close to Rogue damage, but he usually won't survive grabbing a boss' attention any better than a Rogue (both are pretty squishy). Using a Fury Warrior to tank a boss is generally a last resort, and usually only works if the Fury Warrior is wearing full Prot gear (gear in WoW is of equal importance to Talents) and the party is over-geared/leveled. Using a Fury Warrior in Fury gear to tank is almost certainly doomed to failure for any non-trivial encounter.

Hey, that sounds an awful lot like the 3e fighter. In all seriousness though, its not like fantasy rpgs are pulling from wildly different source material. So it shouldn't be all that surprising that similar solutions get used.

 

[Ariosto]

I've seen a lot of criticism of 4e. Some I think are valid, some aren't.

The one criticism that continues to baffle me is the comparison between 4e and World of Warcraft. I see it thrown around all the time. Not just here, but in RL, elsewhere on the internet, etc.

I've played 4e, and I've World of Warcraft; I don't think the comparison is very apt. They have two similarities that I can find, and otherwise are different beasts.

I've noticed that of those that make the claim, very few have played World of Warcraft.

This is purely anecdotal, but I have seen the comparison coming mainly from people who are not into WoW (or MMORPGs, or the current computer-game scene at all) -- and also are not 3E devotees.

My impression is that in those cases it's the first analogy that comes to mind in trying to describe what the heck 4E is like, the fundamental point being that it is so very unlike "old school" D&D. The comparison is usually doubly naive, I think, for want of actual experience playing 4E, so taking it literally is probably to attribute more claim of precision than was intended in the first place.

The mere perception of difference from "how D&D was" is likely to depend a bit on how far back the referent goes. A lot that players of 3E (or even late 2E, perhaps) take for granted is strange to players of Basic+ or Advanced D&D -- and a lot of that has been carried forward into the latest version.

 

[Andor]

I don't think 4e is particularly like WoW. It does however have many elements that remind me heavily of console games like FFT or Disgaea. It also as many elements that are very 'computerish'. In particular the rulebook reads like it was written by someone who just finished a class in object oriented programming.

I think these two factors tend to get conflated into calling it 'videogamish' or 'WoW like".

 

[Doug McCrae]

I don't think 4e is particularly like WoW. It does however have many elements that remind me heavily of console games like FFT or Disgaea. It also as many elements that are very 'computerish'. In particular the rulebook reads like it was written by someone who just finished a class in object oriented programming.

Please explain.

 

[conanb]

I don't think 4e is particularly like WoW. It does however have many elements that remind me heavily of console games like FFT or Disgaea. It also as many elements that are very 'computerish'. In particular the rulebook reads like it was written by someone who just finished a class in object oriented programming.

I think these two factors tend to get conflated into calling it 'videogamish' or 'WoW like".

I'll have to agree wit this. 4th Edition has a distinct feel where combat versus non-combat are very distinct stages. What I am reminded of when we're playing D&D is a Final Fantasy game like FFVII or something like that. The group is running around until they hit an encounter and suddenly we jump to unit versus unit combat.

The parallels I see with World of Warcraft have more to do with it's unique battles, use of terrain and what not in fights. I've played World of Warcraft and there are many things that do give it that flavor. The focus on magic item gear definitely has a feel of wow about it. But then again we were seeing this in the last few books of 3.5 and it's move towards "Armor Sets" and bonuses for having several themed magic items together.

I think the use of "powers" also definitely feels like a videogame, either Wow or some other MMO, where you have several distinct types of attacks by character type.

The whole thing seems very easy to translate to a video game and I look forward to the first D&D video game based off this new rules set. The game itself is still fun but it needs someway to integrate it's combat & non-combat states better.

Just my two cents on the matter.