Is he right?

This. Cos you know, my number one thought when playing an MMO is "Golly gee wowzers, this would a TON more fun if I had to do everything the game is already doing for me but do it by manually with a pencil and calculator in hand!"

>GNS
>relevant to design in 2K17

lel

Even if its not, 4e was very gamey and mechanics focused. It was less an rpg and more a tactical team skirmish game with role playing elements, so obviously having the mechanics be clear and balanced is a good thing. Where they fucked up is in not diversifying the classes enough mechanically and not giving enough utility/exploration powers

This.

Why should a fighter play basically exactly the same as a wizard?

So you switched from pathfinder trolling to 4e trolling?

I guess at least it's being talked about.

"The medium is the message" and form influences function. Changing the delivery changes people's perception and engagement with content and information. This has been established for more than 50 years now, it's hardly a controversial idea.

I also think they fucked up by not making powers more generic, effects based and flexible. Let players build powers with a well developed tool kit and fluff them how they like based on that. 1d6 scaling ranged projectile attack? Magic missile. Upgrade it with the Line and Electric tags? Lesser lightning bolt. Pump up the damage and add burning and aoe and you've got yourself a fireball, knock off the damage and add a push/knockdown effect and you've got a force push type deal.

This doesn't really gel with role based design. It's also pretty complex and easy to minmax/break.

Would work for a system that doesn't really care about those things and focuses on flexibility/ability to stat shit out instead, tho.

That's actually how magic works in that new generic system from Fantasy Flight. Seems promising if you aren't put off by the custom dice.

Yeah, 4e sucked dicks at presentation and immersion but had a good method for cleaning up gameplay. That bit about the technical manual is especially relevant because you get 4e fans like who don't seem to understand why players might want a different experience from say a game designer looking to suss out the mechanics at a glance.

He is stating an opinion. As an opinion, it is valid.
Holding it as some sort of factual reality though is stupid. I guess you are happy because it fits your narrative, but it still is just an opinion.

Pathfinder has tanks that work closer to MMO mechanics than 4e. 4e has game choices, Pathfinder has actual aggro.

Honestly, I'm betting WoTC was thinking

>The real money in RPGs today is in the MMO market.
>We have the biggest RPG brand there is, Dungeons and Dragons.
>But there has never been a truly massively commercially successful D&D MMO.
>Let's make a rulesset that would be easy to translate into an MMO format, so that a couple of years down the line, we can make an MMO based on these rules and unseat World of Warcraft.

Maybe make some abilities/tags/upgrades class exclusive? Really though I think that the abolition of classes is the natural end result of 4e style mechanical homogeneity/balance. It feels like an artifact since most classes play very similarly. Just sort the abilities into different categories/trees and be done with it. It accomplishes the same thing but lets you build your character more how you'd like and makes "multi classing" less of a chore since you could just dip into another tree for exactly the abilities you want, maybe at a higher cost

This shows you didn't actually play 4e tho.

Opinions can be factually correct.

You know, it really does seem to capture something important about roleplaying games, although there’s probably no game in existence which is strictly simulationist, narrativist, etc. I’ve heard that the idea is undercut by actual playtesting data, though; if anyone knows what results are being referred to there, I’d love to know about them.

No. I ASSURE you readers ARE Morons.

Not in this case, though.

But they don’t play anything like each other. Playing a fighter like a monk or a wizard like a warlock or vise-versa was a fast way to get a character killed.

No, he's a fucking moron. Anyone who wants a game to be more vague in its mechanics isn't actually looking for a game, they're looking for a way to lord their superior amounts of time wasted reading shitty rules to be the lawyer they never could be in the real world because they could never hack it in law school, let alone a courtroom.

4e's class/power mechanics were what D&D should have been from the beginning. The only reason people shit on it so hard was because Paizo had ten times the marketing of WotC.

and then they COCKED IT UP AND I AM MAD

It is entirely true in this case. Name one part of the text that is untrue.

>As an opinion, it is valid.
Ideas like this are why america is so fucked. Opinions aren't automagically valid just because they're an opinion. He's basing it off a shitty fallacious premise from the start, his opinion is as wrong as it is shitty.

His opinion is 100% correct. Name one part of it that is wrong.

>Name one part of it that is wrong.
the part where he says the reader isn't an idiot
the part where he suggests rules shouldn't be concise and clear

how many threads on ambiguous rules and awful book formatting do we HAVE on Veeky Forums again?

We have more than one generic, build-your-own games based around the d20 system. They all play very differently from 4e.

"I didn't like the presentation" does not mean that the presentation is wrong.

I actually find it easier to read 5e's rulebook and understand its content than I do with 4e's.

Yeah. Once you think about it like that, 4e starts to look suspiciously easy to program, relative to 3.5.

shame about that murder suicide

And most of them base off of or take cues from the abortion that is 3.X. 4e is very different from a design and intent standpoint

It was going to have a roll20 intergrated feature, but murder-suicide

And they would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for that pesky murder/suicide.

>Let players build powers with a well developed tool kit and fluff them how they like based on that
No.
"just refluff it" is the stupidest fucking approach to an RPG. The entire point of mechanics in an RPG is to model your character, if the rules can be separated from your fluff that easily, you don't need those rules.

...

>murder suicide
What's this? I've been out of the loop I guess.

The most aggravating thing about 4e proponents is their insistence that 4e is the One True System, a perfect game of grace and beauty betrayed by its creators and callously spurned by an unreasoning public. Everyone who disagrees with them is just a moron incapable of grasping the brilliance of 4e; the fact that 5e rapidly eclipsed it and 3.5 continues to be popular is simply proof that the hobby is full of hidebound grognards.

Some guy was used as a blood sacrifice on 02/02 I think.

modenook.com/the-murdersuicide-that-derailed-4th-edition-dungeons-dragons-online/

And then they never made an MMO or something that probably would have been even more successful - a turn-based singleplayer game with an NWN-style toolset.

The most aggravating thing about 4e detractors is their insistence that 4e is the One False System, a perfectly terrible game of clumsy ugliness that it's creators desperately tried to foist upon a justly horrified public. Everyone who disagrees with them is just a moron who'd rather be playing videogames; the fact that 5e had vastly different circumstanced and 3.5 is the most supported edition in history is simply the proof that 4e had no value at all.

Cunt.

I don't quite understand the point. While I agree that presentation matters, and that the superior presentation is in being immersive and descriptive to captivate your players, the onus of that is on the GM. The job of a rulebook is to, you know, tell you the rules of the game. To that end, I actually appreciate the frankness of a technical manual, because then I actually know what to do. If you want to spice it up with some cool art and fiction pieces and quotes, go ahead, but watering down the rules in an attempt to be more easily digestible and streamlined is a slippery slope to compromising the integrity of your game simply just to draw in a bigger crowd.

Did I understand this right? I didn't quite grasp the context of what he was saying.

This. Despite the fact that I personally don't like 4e, I can see how a PnP RPG with strong focus on miniatures and combat mechanics could appeal to some people. It reminds me of playing the D&D minis game back in my 3.5 days. But god damn if 4rries aren't the most insufferable faggots. Any criticism against their edition is met with "U JUS DUN UNDERSTAND THE BRILLIANT DESIGN!!!"

Fuck man, I barely even play D&D, I've had fun with 5th edition but I'm so burned out on medieval fantasy at this point.

No, it's one of many bad systems.

Well... yeah. The actual consensus seems to be something like "4e is good at what it does— tactical combat at a highish power level." There are screaming idiots who insist that it is a perfectly terrible game with no value whatsoever, but this is true for essentially any topic you can imagine discussing on the internet. On the other hand, 4e fans aren't universally condescending, but they come irritatingly close to it.

I don't see how have more byzantine rulesbooks is more likely to get players to roleplay out the ability than the flavor text on a power card.

I imagine those same style of players just go read the section of the manual (or use a hotsheet they have for it, or just remember the rules bits) and just declare they are using the ability and roll for it, without roleplaying it out any.

I don't see how presentation factors into it.

If you want to say that separating abilities into power cards from skill checks and other things as more nebulous stuff to look up in a book causes play effects. Sure. I imagine in 4e people were more likely to use abilities to solve problems than to improvise weird ideas that them involve skill checks or ability checks as quickly decided upon by the GM.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing - as this snippet of text mentions, the abilities in 4e got players to focus more on space as a real thing to be interacted with that mattered, bringing in more tactics.

I think that a focus on how many people your charm ability can affect at once also is not going to encourage less roleplaying than just making a skill check that could effect a number as determined by the GM's description of success. While you might have more collaborative storytelling in the latter case, I imagine with the kind of players we're talking about those groups do not believe in modern hippie gaming concepts like collaborative storytelling and prefer the GM to be godlike and imperial.

Regardless, I think that giving people very precise abilities lets them handle problems in a concrete way that encourages creativity.

Instead of just rolling to charm the crowd, if I know my ability only works on 3 people at once and we have 6 people in the crowd and very little time to distract them before shit hits the fan, that creates a problem to be solved. A multi-step puzzle as opposed to just a flowery description of success or failure in one step.

What is Neverwinter Online

At the cost of sounding like one of the fans you decry, it's still the best D&D out there though.

Yeah I much prefer arguing over the precise wording of an abstractly written rule than playing the fucking game.

How in the world can you argue that purposefully obfuscating what a game mechanic does is somehow a good thing?

Give me a MMO that play like 4e, I fucking dare you.

>404 not found
CONSPIRACY!??

Wow, you're a moron.
>the part where he says the reader isn't an idiot
You are a reader, therefore you are an idiot, therefore your opinion is invalid. Enjoy your circular logic.
>the part where he suggests rules shouldn't be concise and clear
He never said that, he said the rules shouldn't trample the role part of roleplaying

His images were for ants, I imagine he's fixing them.

It might be a good game but it's not a good D&D.

That's not my point.
Give me a SINGLE MMO that play like 4e. I will instantly suscribe.
There is fucking none.

Meant for

whelp
was a bit too fast for you

I have no doubt that a more mechanical "numbers and squares" system would appeal to minecraft autists like you. Some of us like a little more elbow room in our games. I for one fucking hate using a grid with miniatures and prefer "theater of the mind" style which 4e is completely incapable of doing. However, for an indigo child like yourself, I know abstractions like that can be difficult to imagine, and a "go with the flow" structure can trigger anxiety.

No! All opinions, no matter how based in reality are equal!

Opinions are subjective not objective.
Otherwise, they would be facts.

Neverwinter

Thank you to remind me.

In case you bitch about that too.

I see you were finally able to size your image correctly. Third times a charm.

Exactly! All opinions are equal, ask a doctor his opinion on your treatment, the same as asking Marv at the gas station.

Ask an idiot why they like 4e, the same as asking a genius why it failed.

The only resemblance with 4e is in the name of the power. That's it. It play nothing like it.

Are you just pretending to be retarded?

Don't say it! Nobody must know!

Are you? Or do you really not understand what subjective encompasses? Do you really think that educated opinions are equal to ones with no thought put into them?

I think you should reread the chain of comments.
You look like a retard. He's agreeing with you.

a : a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter We asked them for their opinions about the new stadium.
b : approval, esteem I have no great opinion of his work.
2 a : belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge a person of rigid opinions
b : a generally held view news programs that shape public opinion
3 a : a formal expression of judgment or advice by an expert My doctor says that I need an operation, but I'm going to get a second opinion.
b : the formal expression (as by a judge, court, or referee) of the legal reasons and principles upon which a legal decision is based The article discusses the recent Supreme Court opinion.

Same word, 3 possible uses, only the third mentions about PROFESSIONAL opinions, which are a separate category.

Yes.

This, proven here: FFtactics, Crimson Eyes, 1000 Swords, any other grid based multi-character controlling battle system simulation.

Which is worse, because at least with MMOs you're dealing with other people. they turned it into a single player tactics game without any nod to strategy, roleplaying, or anything outside of bland technical perfection. It was wonderfully balanced and it's a great miniatures combat game, but it's not a good roleplaying game at all.

Sorry, you went too far back. You're right, the top of the chain agrees, but it directly contradicts the tone of so you're wrong to assume it's the same user.

I'm going to take your backpedaling as an apology.

You're conflating my point with someone else in this thread. 4e REQUIRES a grid and minis. If someone else here would like to tell me a fun story of them getting it to work without them, I'd love to hear it. I don't like a grid and minis, my players and I sit on a couch around a coffee table that is strictly for dice rolling and drink setting. Lugging around a bunch of shit is unappealing to me, which is why I moved over to pdfs so I only ever need my laptop to play. I don't even know why I'm in this argument, I don't even really play D&D, I like more freeform RPGs anyway, it's just you stupid 4th ed morons are so rage inducing with you blatant autism masked by elitism. And I don't mean Veeky Forums insult autism, I'm quite literally convinced that most people that prefer 4e are on the spectrum somewhere.

Ooh, don't understand it so you tried to paste the google definiton! Then you got all confused about the legal definition instead of what we were talking about.

Great job, you'll definitely stop being retarded that way.

You would be better served going for the subjective angle when you don't understand opinions, user

>It play nothing like it.

Maybe if your GM is a hack

>you don't need those rules
How the fuck is this the conclusion you reach? You don't need the fluff if it can be separated from rules which is liberating and gives much more leeway to the players to make their dude exactly as they want but still work within the ruleset of the game.

The murder/suicide didn't really stop the digital application.
It was never going to be finished in the first place.
If one employee dying is enough to completely shut down a project ( and apparently they only had ONE guy on it ), then it would have been shut down for any number of reason.
Hell that guy, instead of suicide, simply quit his job for whatever reason and the project would have been just as fucked. They never intended on finishing it.
The whole thing was probably just a side project with the guy mainly working on something else.

No, it was an act of nature or else this would be the greatest game ever!

just refluff monopoly and play that.

You clearly weren't around back then to remember just how hard WotC was pimping that shit. They had that whore all dolled up. You have to be 18 or older to visit Veeky Forums bub.

Wakfu is the closest I can think of but it's not quite 4e enough. Still fun though.

Explain this statement cause it makes zero sense from any perspective i look at it.

>You clearly weren't around back then to remember just how hard WotC was pimping that shit
That contradicts the fact that the death of one developer completely halted the project.

Don't try to bullshit me, faggot. Even the stats aren't the fucking same. Pick a power in 4e, look it up in Nevewinter. Whoops, they are completely different and doesn't even use the same mechanics!

I played 4e without a grid and without mini.

Guild Wars 1.

His code was poorly documented, but he was the primary person working on the online toolset that looked like they were developing a sort of "proto-roll20". They advertised that shit everywhere, "all 4e books come with a digital code" they put a bunch of previously free site features behind a paywall and were working on digital tabletop feature, then the guy dies. WotC's company mission statement is probably "eggs in one basket"