In my experience in MMO's, unless you are playing exclusively solo or with close friends, then you are expected to min/max to MAXIMUM efficiency at ALL TIMES, or you will be brutally punished(made fun of in groups, avoided or banned from participating in events, basically driven from the game, etc). "Role-playing" has nothing to do with playing out your character's life, it means playing a "role" in whatever group you are in to accomplish tasks with maximum efficiency(tank, damage dealer, healer, etc). These games turn into little more than a rat race of grind xp, get better loot to grind better xp, to get better loot to grind better xp, repeat ad nauseum. You are not your character, you're a cog in the machine. If your class happens to use Great axes the best, guess what? You're going to use a Great axe, like it or not. If you're not wearing the most 1337 gear and e-peening, then "urdoinitwrong." Individuality and play style preferences outside of the status quo are taboo. Do I sound bitter?Let me tell you, if I were in a fantasy world and my life depended on whether my fellow party members and I made smart decisions in our training and outfitting, you bet I'd be upset with one of them if they were relying on training or equipment that is less than optimal.
You're exactly right. Why bother with thematic ideas, experimental builds, or characters whose backgrounds have prevented them from being an elite super-soldier every time. No underdogs allowed! Adhere to the status quo or be punished; no free thinkers allowed! Everybody just roll a wizard, cleric or druid and hit the "I Win" button.
Edit: Addendum: I see what you're getting at, but 90% of the time in FFXI, you're just cleaving through waves of non-lethal easy targets. And for table-top gaming, some groups aren't all about min/maxing and power-gaming, so do what you will.
You're exactly right. Why bother with thematic ideas, experimental builds, or characters whose backgrounds have prevented them from being an elite super-soldier every time. No underdogs allowed! Adhere to the status quo or be punished; no free thinkers allowed! Everybody just roll a wizard, cleric or druid and hit the "I Win" button.
Edit: Addendum: I see what you're getting at, but 90% of the time in FFXI, you're just cleaving through waves of non-lethal easy targets. And for table-top gaming, some groups aren't all about min/maxing and power-gaming, so do what you will.
Right. I'm just saying that complaining that optimization isn't "realistic" is probably wrong. If real life were like D&D, everyone would optimize to the best of their ability because if they didn't they would stand a higher chance of suffering a grisly death.
So you can certainly complain that this sort of laser focus on optimization isn't fun, but it's a lot tougher to make the argument that the optimization is preventing you from playing your character "realistically".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Truth be told this isn't the thread for the optimization conversation. I see how it's related, but this is the thread about positivity and fostering a welcoming community for all styles of play.
If you want to rail for or against charOp, there's a thread for that.
If you want to deride other styles of play (with varying degrees of commitment) there are threads for that.
In this thread, we like people and we don't mind them enjoying themselves in the fashion that works for them, so long as they reciprocate the sentiment.
I play LoTRO and find it suits me fine as I can solo for most of the time granted you need to be in a fellowship to do the arc plot but generally I've had no problems..and yes I have heard MMO language used at the table but usually in relation to 4e which almost begs it
|
I play LoTRO and find it suits me fine as I can solo for most of the time granted you need to be in a fellowship to do the arc plot but generally I've had no problems..and yes I have heard MMO language used at the table but usually in relation to 4e which almost begs it
Thats because 4E is really MMO: The Role Playing Game. The CCG is coming out next week.
The wife and I are avid tabletop and MMO players; we also are very much inclined towards RP over in-game grind...and found our secret to finding really good people to RP with in-game and sometimes carry over to tabletop/play by post/iRC RP.
The way to determine if someone will RP well with others or not is directly correlated to how much they want to compete with in-game NPCs for glory and/or fill a role within the setting. While this may sound like a no-brainer, or standard MarySueSpotting 101, it actually has been the biggest aid to my acquisition of roleplayers who are awesome; they integrate themselves into the world non-disruptively, while at the same time maintaining a measure of uniqueness that isn't unreasonable or implausible.
For some the sliding scale of silliness versus seriousness will apply as well; I have goofball characters, but even they tend to fit into the world because of their quirks, not in spite of them. Your mileage, naturally, will vary - one might not see the value in a character named 'Zomgwut', unless one has the right add-ons installed...but then, with them, one might see the character's name is actually 'Zom G. Wut', due to that being on the nametag he was issued because that was the transcription of what he said after the bored first NPC one encountered after entering the world (guilty as charged and true story - my Forsaken warrior came up remembering nothing of his original life, so when the first guy proceeded to go 'blah blah undead blah blah second life blah blah Banshee Queen', he said verbatim, "Zom...guh...WHAT?!?" in response to the question about his name. Five seconds, a sharpie, and a "Hi My Name Is" nametag later, Zomgwut ventures into the world).
You're exactly right. Why bother with thematic ideas, experimental builds, or characters whose backgrounds have prevented them from being an elite super-soldier every time. No underdogs allowed! Adhere to the status quo or be punished; no free thinkers allowed! Everybody just roll a wizard, cleric or druid and hit the "I Win" button.
Edit: Addendum: I see what you're getting at, but 90% of the time in FFXI, you're just cleaving through waves of non-lethal easy targets. And for table-top gaming, some groups aren't all about min/maxing and power-gaming, so do what you will.
Right. I'm just saying that complaining that optimization isn't "realistic" is probably wrong. If real life were like D&D, everyone would optimize to the best of their ability because if they didn't they would stand a higher chance of suffering a grisly death.
So you can certainly complain that this sort of laser focus on optimization isn't fun, but it's a lot tougher to make the argument that the optimization is preventing you from playing your character "realistically".
My character swings a great axe bigger than a coffee table and casts magical spells. I have a Moogle living in my house and I carry entire arsenals for multiple jobs in my backpack. Realism isn't one of my concerns when I play a MMO, lol.
I also understand the time-old argument a lot of MMO players give in that if you aren't 100% optimized at all times, you are slowing them down and wasting other people's time and money. Fair enough. I typically gear the best I can for whatever role I'm asked to fill, but I refuse to spend real-life days at a time camping a spot, waiting for a monster to appear who drops some powerful item but only has a 2% drop rate. No thanks, I'll make do with what I have access to. Anytime my play involves the success of other people, yes, I do come to the table ringing whatever is expected of me, but I'm just get tired of getting ridiculed for thinking "outside of the box", even when I play solo.
In table-top RPG's, the challenges that face the group are much more adjustable, given that you have a living DM, and not a computer program. I like playing with unusual class combos and making them into something effective that no one saw coming. I once retired a Shadowcaster/Warmage because it was annihilating anything the DM threw at us, and those 2 classes are typically seen as a joke.
I play LoTRO and find it suits me fine as I can solo for most of the time granted you need to be in a fellowship to do the arc plot but generally I've had no problems..and yes I have heard MMO language used at the table but usually in relation to 4e which almost begs itThats because 4E is really MMO: The Role Playing Game. The CCG is coming out next week.
I can see that, and honestly I don't understand why 4e fans get so upset when someone makes a comparison between the system and MMO's. Maybe because the term is used in a degrading way, but really, it's true, and it's not really a bad thing. It's funny, because I have a very close friend who is a HUGE fan of 4e, gets completely insulted by the MMO comparison, and the guy has never played a MMO in his life. He can't see the comparison because he has no idea what to look for, all he knows is he thinks something he enjoys is getting made fun of, when it's not.
I play MMO's. I enjoy them. To say a certain edition has elements of something I enjoy is not an insult, to me at least. If anything, I'm a prime candidate for D&D's advertising campaign; I'm just not into what they're selling.
I love to eat sushi and I love to eat pizza, but sushi pizza just doesn't sit well with my gut. If someone else happens to enjoy it, then that's great! If this particular kind of pizza opens a few minds about sushi and brings some new fans over, all the better.
I can see that, and honestly I don't understand why 4e fans get so upset when someone makes a comparison between the system and MMO's. Maybe because the term is used in a degrading way, but really, it's true, and it's not really a bad thing. It's funny, because I have a very close friend who is a HUGE fan of 4e, gets completely insulted by the MMO comparison, and the guy has never played a MMO in his life. He can't see the comparison because he has no idea what to look for, all he knows is he thinks something he enjoys is getting made fun of, when it's not.
I play the crap out of WoW, and I play the crap out of 4e. They are nothing alike on anything more than a superficial level. One is an MMO, one is a tabletop game. They are both roleplaying games, but are at very different points on that spectrum.
Did 4e learn some lessons from WoW? Absolutely. More tabletop games should have learned these lessons. Did learning those lessons transform 4e into MMO: The Roleplaying Game? No, absolutely not.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do we really need this to be about 4e?
Even if, in some way, the MMO-like aspects of 4e are on-topic... this is the thread of inclusion.
People should be every bit as open-minded about 4e as they are about MMO terminology.
Let's grow up a bit, and stop deriding games because of an imagined opposition to the product we chose to buy. That opposition is in your head, children! Paizo and DnD are friends.
Can't we be friendly community instead of reverting to tribal warfare at every imagined slight?
One feeds the other, and basically can not be seperated, since computer games started to emulate RPGs. This is a natural progression, because computers are a neutral arbitrator for rules systems, just throw in some eye candy, online communication, and you can take it as far as you like. As to the terminology, I had the same problem when dealing with military folks. In those instances, I just had to ask what the majority of acronyms meant.
If you want to place your RPG on a pedestal, and determine only certain types of people should be involved, then good luck finding the players.
I can see that, and honestly I don't understand why 4e fans get so upset when someone makes a comparison between the system and MMO's. Maybe because the term is used in a degrading way, but really, it's true, and it's not really a bad thing. It's funny, because I have a very close friend who is a HUGE fan of 4e, gets completely insulted by the MMO comparison, and the guy has never played a MMO in his life. He can't see the comparison because he has no idea what to look for, all he knows is he thinks something he enjoys is getting made fun of, when it's not.I play the crap out of WoW, and I play the crap out of 4e. They are nothing alike on anything more than a superficial level. One is an MMO, one is a tabletop game. They are both roleplaying games, but are at very different points on that spectrum.
Did 4e learn some lessons from WoW? Absolutely. More tabletop games should have learned these lessons. Did learning those lessons transform 4e into MMO: The Roleplaying Game? No, absolutely not.
Opinions, man. The hilarious part is there is a WoW 3.5 game, literally World of Warcraft the RPG, and nobody got all in a tiff about it.
The comparisons I see are more with the mechanics, which aren't a far stretch from previous editions either. The Daily, Encounter, and At-will use of powers is easily comparable to a bunch of abilities you get in Final Fantasy Online for example, with cool-down timers and frequency of use. FF has "powers" that can only be used once every 2 hours, some once every 10 minutes, 5 minutes, 30 seconds, etc. An average encounter with an Even Match(challenge designator) monster might go 1-2 minutes, so blowing your 2-Hour ability is fairly close to using a Daily Power, An Encounter Power has a similar cooldown to maybe a 5 minute ability, etc. Even 3e has similar special ability usage frequencies, they're just spread out a lot more and unique as opposed to being balanced and standardized. To say they are "nothing" alike is just sticking your head in the sand.
And don't get me started on the forced roles of classes. Defender(tank), Striker(DD/dps), Controller, etc. These designations have existed in every edition of D&D, but in 4e they feel much more forced. Note, I said "feel", as in my opinion, not fact. Earlier editions allowed for a lot more flexibility in filling party roles in my opinion. Heck, in our old Age of Worms campaign(3.5), the party Assassin/Rogue was our main healer by use of wands and scrolls with UMD. Optimal? Hell no. But, it worked in a pinch with no other healers around, and lots of wands available.
Older MMO's like Ultima Online weren't so blunt with class selection, you simply skilled up what you wanted to be good at, as long as you kept it within a certain amount of skill points by the end. 4e, just like most modern MMO's, streamlined this by whitewashing the gray areas and stamping a role on each class's front page. This certainly makes class selection smoother and easier, but sort of takes away some of that flexibility. I personally like the flexibility better, but I've played with lots of players who prefer seeing a class spelled out as to what it's purpose is up front. By the end of 3e, there were lots of new classes we simply didn't know what to do with, whether they were there to heal, tank, deal damage, etc(Ardent? Binder?).
You can remove the MMO and TT prefixes, but you still have RPG at the end. Flat out denying any connection is a cop out.
Do we really need this to be about 4e?
Even if, in some way, the MMO-like aspects of 4e are on-topic... this is the thread of inclusion.
People should be every bit as open-minded about 4e as they are about MMO terminology.
Let's grow up a bit, and stop deriding games because of an imagined opposition to the product we chose to buy. That opposition is in your head, children! Paizo and DnD are friends.
Can't we be friendly community instead of reverting to tribal warfare at every imagined slight?
I've been comparing the correlation of MMO's and RPG's in general. Talk to the 4venger up there. My only real mentions of 4e come form the fact that it's the first edition of the "world's most popular role playing game" that acknowledges MMO's and sought to get the attention of that crowd. Table-top RPG's and video game RPG's in general have been building off of each other in small ways since the 80's.
Anything else I've written has been a reaction to biased prodding and claims of badwrongfun.
My comment was not directed at any individual, just the course of conversation.
Do we really need this to be about 4e?
Even if, in some way, the MMO-like aspects of 4e are on-topic... this is the thread of inclusion.
People should be every bit as open-minded about 4e as they are about MMO terminology.
Let's grow up a bit, and stop deriding games because of an imagined opposition to the product we chose to buy. That opposition is in your head, children! Paizo and DnD are friends.
Can't we be friendly community instead of reverting to tribal warfare at every imagined slight?
NO! The sky cake will only taste good in the afterlife if the sky baklava and sky streudel people don't get their sky dessert! And my sky RPG of choice is only fun if players of other sky RPGs are unable to enjoy their games!
</pattonoswald>
The whole 4E=MMO is bound to come up because the basic structure of the powers and the focus on DDI make it the easy comparison. Nothing more, nothing less. Actual accuracy usually has little bearing when such correlations are made. 3.5, and D20 in general, didn't make any comparison easy, so the topic never really came up. If there had been an easy comparison to connect that system to some other product out there, I gaurantee it would have been made, and I'm sure that some people still tried to find comparisons even though none were encompassing enough to stick with the whole community.
The whole 4E=MMO is bound to come up because the basic structure of the powers and the focus on DDI make it the easy comparison. Nothing more, nothing less. Actual accuracy usually has little bearing when such correlations are made. 3.5, and D20 in general, didn't make any comparison easy, so the topic never really came up. If there had been an easy comparison to connect that system to some other product out there, I gaurantee it would have been made, and I'm sure that some people still tried to find comparisons even though none were encompassing enough to stick with the whole community.
I think it's just a matter of timing more than anything. 3.0 D&D was out before WoW, and even though other MMO's existed at the time, they didn't have such a huge draw and household name like WoW did. 3.0 might have had a tiny bit of influence from MMO's, but in it's first incarnation the two were mostly unaware of each other.
4e conception just happen to be at a point in time when WoW is up and rolling, with millions of subscribers. 4e would be here regardless of whether WoW existed or not, but in our timeline they just happen to co-exist. Maybe the developers of 4e were spurred to action by having a glance at the sheer money-making power and media influence WoW has, but maybe not. They just happen to co-exist.
With 3.0-3.5 resurrecting the D&D brand from the bankrupt TSR, it helped make the brand a household name about the same time WoW was gaining mass popularity. The two were destined to collide at some point; again, see the WoW 3.0 campaign setting for proof.
As I mentioned above, video game RPG's and table-top RPG's have been evolving alongside each other for decades. When I play Ultima Exodus or the original Final Fantasy on my NES, I see winks and nods to D&D scattered throughout the games. Heck, Final Fantasy even had Mind Flayers, just renamed as "Wizards".
My play style as a TTRPG gamer has been absolutely influenced heavily by video games. To see TTRPG's in turn influenced by video games is truly a sign of the times. We could all stand to expand our gaming lingo a bit, just as old-schoolers learn what DPS and Tanks are, new schoolers can learn about Munchkins, CoDzilla's, etc.
Paizo and DnD are friends.
That isn't how capitalism works at all.
Paizo and DnD are friends.That isn't how capitalism works at all.
The OGL exists. Capitalism is not the sole paradigm here, or else the OGL could not exist.
When I say friends, I mean they know eachother. Personally. And interact. With a level of amicability that would positively shock the edition warriors. They did, after all, work for the same game for a long time.
The comparisons I see are more with the mechanics, which aren't a far stretch from previous editions either. The Daily, Encounter, and At-will use of powers is easily comparable to a bunch of abilities you get in Final Fantasy Online for example, with cool-down timers and frequency of use.
My characters in Mass Effect have cooldown timers, too - guess 4e must be video gamey! Or, maybe, Mass Effect must be MMO: The Video Game!
My characters in 3.5 have daily powers! Those are like cooldowns! Must be an MMO!
The issue is not with the fact that mechanical similarities exist between tabletop games and certain video games. That is beyond dispute. The issue is with the idea that this is unique to a particular tabletop game, or that the mechanic is unique to MMOs.
You can't call 4e MMO: The Roleplaying Game without applying that same standard to other roleplaying games, and other mediums of entertainment. The entire comparison crumbles under any kind of close examination. It's a meaningless way of comparing things, and the worst part is that it's usually used to make a certain game appear in a negative light while ignoring the ways that the same comparison could be used to make the speaker's game of choice appear in that same negative light.
We can really, really stop drawing meaningless comparisons like this. It's not hard. There are other things that actually merit discussion.
The comparisons I see are more with the mechanics, which aren't a far stretch from previous editions either. The Daily, Encounter, and At-will use of powers is easily comparable to a bunch of abilities you get in Final Fantasy Online for example, with cool-down timers and frequency of use.My characters in Mass Effect have cooldown timers, too - guess 4e must be video gamey! Or, maybe, Mass Effect must be MMO: The Video Game!
My characters in 3.5 have daily powers! Those are like cooldowns! Must be an MMO!
The issue is not with the fact that mechanical similarities exist between tabletop games and certain video games. That is beyond dispute. The issue is with the idea that this is unique to a particular tabletop game, or that the mechanic is unique to MMOs.
You can't call 4e MMO: The Roleplaying Game without applying that same standard to other roleplaying games, and other mediums of entertainment. The entire comparison crumbles under any kind of close examination. It's a meaningless way of comparing things, and the worst part is that it's usually used to make a certain game appear in a negative light while ignoring the ways that the same comparison could be used to make the speaker's game of choice appear in that same negative light.
We can really, really stop drawing meaningless comparisons like this. It's not hard. There are other things that actually merit discussion.
I think it is easier to make the comparisons in 4E than something like 3.5 because the of the presentation. When every class has the same basic mechanics, and those mechanics are laid bare for all to see, comparisons are going to be easier, and thus, more likely. 3.5's classes were set up in such a way that while the base mechanics are similar in some key ways, the actual descriptions varied considerably. This made the classes seem more different than they actually are. By simplifying the descriptions in 4E to pure raw mechanical terms, they made the game more accessible to new players since the raw mechanics were more easily digested, but the side effect of that is they also made it easier to tie to other non related products. While 4E plays very differently from an MMO, one cannot completely discount the fact that on paper, they look very similar since new players often first see the concept on paper, not in action.
I think it is easier to make the comparisons in 4E than something like 3.5 because the of the presentation. When every class has the same basic mechanics, and those mechanics are laid bare for all to see, comparisons are going to be easier, and thus, more likely.
I think this is a solid observation. Mechanical transparency is definitely a shared trait.
Paizo and DnD are friends.That isn't how capitalism works at all.
Eh. This doesn't reflect understanding of how capitalism works. It's pretty much better for all to have the competition. Without it, there's stagnation. It might seem like capitalism has "winners" and "losers," but really, if Pathfinder and Paizo bottomed out, it wouldn't be because WotC put out a product that was strictly superior and the masses accepted this and blah blah blah. More likely, it would be a symptom that there isn't room for hobbies, causing both to bottom out. Basically, both companies have the same initial goal: before "get people to buy" it's "get people to be interested." So both companies will team up to get the general (read: Non-Tabletop gaming) populace to be interested in the hobby. If they can do that, some will inevitably gravitate to one product, some to the other, as they are varied enough to warrant different target audiences.
Further, take two competing oil companies (best example of a low-elasticity resource I could think of). They're each getting a divided market share. Maybe one of them isn't getting enough to survive as a company, yeah? Maybe they, in their desperation to compete, and to thrive, try a radical new method of refining (or what have you). Maybe this new way is so much more efficient that it allows them to stay afloat even with unfavorable market shares. The other company hears of this hot new tech. They bargain for it with the now more efficient company. Agreement is made. Now the small company gets paid by the larger one for use of their tech, and the larger one increases its efficiency, and its overhead, despite the payment they have to render to the smaller one.
This sort of thing doesn't happen in monopoly, because it doesn't NEED to. I could say people are lazy, but I don't believe that. But they are unwilling to spend resources trying fix what isn't broken. This sort of thing happens in capitalism and free market because it needs to.
It IS how capitalism works.
Edit: Fine, I know. Nitpicky, ranty, and off-topic. Deal.
|
on the topic of mmos... as one who LOVES DDO.
Which is a more fun MMO? DDO or something like FF tactics? (obviously this is subjective).
The fact is, we can make the MMO jokes about 4E, but since 3E has it's own MMO... they fall a bit flat and ironic (almost in the dramatic sense).
I think my largest problem with the other thread, and one that seems to be continued here is the implication (outright statement actually) that MMOs are 'mindless, dumb-downed' experiences by people who claim to hate and/or have never played MMOs. I might be able to see the point with WoW, but still not even then would I tolerate the intolerance (:p).
As someone who has loved the genre since EQ, and played WAY to many to count... it offends me to the point that to post my proper response would breach civility.
|
|
I like DDO...it has the narrator and you can't really succeed at some tasks without a party, which is awesome.
But, you see, when a person says MMO they generally think WOW, which is a mindless dumbed-down game. Grind, go dungeon, grind, go instance, grind, go raid. PVP PVP PVP...no thanks...i have better things to do with my time. And i played wow on and off untill cataclysm came out. Then i just quit, sold my account and am never again going to play it.
Which is a more fun MMO? DDO or something like FF tactics? (obviously this is subjective).
I'm much more a fan of Tactics style games. This is partly because there's less of a need for other people for me to enjoy the game.
Pathfinder is great, because it's impossible without others, however MMOs have intermittent options of soloing that allow folks to go on their own, that gets really lonely after a while, and a lot of the grind becomes less appealing very quickly.
Most other games provide some sort of single player experience, or at least a host of AI to fight.
I like DDO...it has the narrator and you can't really succeed at some tasks without a party, which is awesome.
But, you see, when a person says MMO they generally think WOW, which is a mindless dumbed-down game. Grind, go dungeon, grind, go instance, grind, go raid. PVP PVP PVP...no thanks...i have better things to do with my time. And i played wow on and off untill cataclysm came out. Then i just quit, sold my account and am never again going to play it.
It sounds like someone never bothered to participate in top-tier raiding. Shooting for heroic 25-man achievements as part of a realm-first-targeted raiding guild is anything but mindless.
It sounds like someone never bothered to participate in top-tier raiding. Shooting for heroic 25-man achievements as part of a realm-first-targeted raiding guild is anything but mindless.I like DDO...it has the narrator and you can't really succeed at some tasks without a party, which is awesome.
But, you see, when a person says MMO they generally think WOW, which is a mindless dumbed-down game. Grind, go dungeon, grind, go instance, grind, go raid. PVP PVP PVP...no thanks...i have better things to do with my time. And i played wow on and off untill cataclysm came out. Then i just quit, sold my account and am never again going to play it.
See, that gets closer to my distaste for standard issue so-called 'Epic' play - it's less about the fun, more about the big numbers, epeen jousting, and "FIFTY DEE KAY PEE MINUS".
That, and while going for firsts is not a bad thing by any means, it's about as annoying as the person who jumps into every damned thread they can find on the internet just so they can post 'FIRST LULz'.
Also, I have fun more with the exploration aspect, the lore (yeah I know hush), and the crafting. Because, at heart, I may not be a material farmer, but part of my favorite time spent in RP is while doing the mundane things that happen in the background between adventures.
See, that gets closer to my distaste for standard issue so-called 'Epic' play - it's less about the fun, more about the big numbers, epeen jousting, and "FIFTY DEE KAY PEE MINUS".
It's less about what you consider fun, but if you're the sort who enjoys overcoming truly monumental gameplay challenges that demand utter mastery of the game, those raids are incredibly fun and rewarding.
That, and while going for firsts is not a bad thing by any means, it's about as annoying as the person who jumps into every damned thread they can find on the internet just so they can post 'FIRST LULz'.
Er...how?
A realm-first kill is a noteworthy accomplishment. Because of the nature of the constraints placed on guilds purely by virtue of the realm they play on, being the first to down a boss is a pretty solid indication that you represent the most skillful, most dedicated players that realm has to offer.
In other words, it's nothing at all like hopping into a thread to shout "FIRST!"
Also, I have fun more with the exploration aspect, the lore (yeah I know hush), and the crafting. Because, at heart, I may not be a material farmer, but part of my favorite time spent in RP is while doing the mundane things that happen in the background between adventures.
Right, clearly raiding isn't your style. That's fine. Casual players certainly make up the majority of the WoW player base.
But there's a difference between preferring casual play and calling a game mindless because you elect not to involve yourself in the more challenging aspects of the game.
I mean, if you played chess against nothing but four year-olds, you'd probably find it mindless, too.
|
|
But there's a difference between preferring casual play and calling a game mindless because you elect not to involve yourself in the more challenging aspects of the game.
I mean, if you played chess against nothing but four year-olds, you'd probably find it mindless, too.
Reading this over and over again... it seems like you're hitting yourself.
Reading this over and over again... it seems like you're hitting yourself.But there's a difference between preferring casual play and calling a game mindless because you elect not to involve yourself in the more challenging aspects of the game.
I mean, if you played chess against nothing but four year-olds, you'd probably find it mindless, too.
Pardon?
Back to the original idea about getting/welcoming new blood into gaming, I have been doing something that seems to work pretty well thus far.
I've drafted up a whole bunch of premade characters. Non-standard kinds, because if I'm going to spend hours and hours building characters, I don't think I could stand cookie cutter ones. Sorted them into these nifty little folders by character archetype, (Fighter, mage, thief, etc) right? Invited pretty much any person I think might be even remotely interested in Pathfinder to participate in a one-shot adventure (usually using premade PF modules or PFS modules).
The turnout has actually been pretty good (though I don't know how much is genuine interest in tabletop RPGs, and how much is that I just have a magnetic personality ;), it can be done with minimal preparation (as long as you are prepared to be patient and explain EVERYTHING, and possibly provide snacks), and, sometimes, people will enjoy it. And they'll want to do it again. Suddenly, WE HAVE THEM!
So yeah, this is a thing I would recommend to people. If you use premade characters and modules, it's not too difficult to GM for one of these, either. My recommendations etc. are based on personal experience, and YMMV, but for those who want to recruit new blood, but aren't sure how, this is one possible solution.
|
|
It sounds like someone never bothered to participate in top-tier raiding. Shooting for heroic 25-man achievements as part of a realm-first-targeted raiding guild is anything but mindless.I like DDO...it has the narrator and you can't really succeed at some tasks without a party, which is awesome.
But, you see, when a person says MMO they generally think WOW, which is a mindless dumbed-down game. Grind, go dungeon, grind, go instance, grind, go raid. PVP PVP PVP...no thanks...i have better things to do with my time. And i played wow on and off untill cataclysm came out. Then i just quit, sold my account and am never again going to play it.
The evil internet fairys ate my post.
There was a long post here about me doing raids and being ostracized by the part of the WoW community that is comprised of uncivil idiots for having sub-optimal trinkets. I also mentioned that there were also civil, polite and helpful players.
Also I did top-tier raids, never a realm first I'm afraid, but I did them. Got boring after say sixth time we did the same raid for gear.
And for the end, if an MMO player asks me to play in my game, i will, of course let him, and guide him down the role-play path. New blood is good as it expands the player/GM pool.
So all who want to play this wonderful game, welcome!
|
|
Pardon?Reading this over and over again... it seems like you're hitting yourself.But there's a difference between preferring casual play and calling a game mindless because you elect not to involve yourself in the more challenging aspects of the game.
I mean, if you played chess against nothing but four year-olds, you'd probably find it mindless, too.
Ah I misunderstood you. My mistake, ignore it. (somewhere in there I reversed your intent)
I personally don't care for MMOs. I don't know why, but they all come across as repetitive to me. Not that RPGs don't have similar levels of repetitiveness, just doesn't have that feel to me. In anycase, I don't really care where new blood comes from, whether it be MMOs or not. I do graon when I here the terminology brought into RPGs - tank, toon, kiting, squishies, and so forth, however I'm not one to discourage it. About the only thing I don't like about new blood from MMOs making the leap into trying out RPGs is the damned tech toys at the table. I have a strict NO DIGITAL MEDIA rule in games I run. What, you don't have a dead-tree edition of the PHB only a PDF copy on your tablet/iPhone/iPad/e-Reader/digital media X device? No problem, here you can borrow mine for the session. That's my main gripe. Digital media has it's palce, just not in the games I run.
|
|
I personally don't care for MMOs. I don't know why, but they all come across as repetitive to me. Not that RPGs don't have similar levels of repetitiveness, just doesn't have that feel to me. In anycase, I don't really care where new blood comes from, whether it be MMOs or not. I do graon when I here the terminology brought into RPGs - tank, toon, kiting, squishies, and so forth, however I'm not one to discourage it. About the only thing I don't like about new blood from MMOs making the leap into trying out RPGs is the damned tech toys at the table. I have a strict NO DIGITAL MEDIA rule in games I run. What, you don't have a dead-tree edition of the PHB only a PDF copy on your tablet/iPhone/iPad/e-Reader/digital media X device? No problem, here you can borrow mine for the session. That's my main gripe. Digital media has it's palce, just not in the games I run.
What is your gripe with having digital stuff? It can be invaluable sometimes...especially for a GM...
The comparisons I see are more with the mechanics, which aren't a far stretch from previous editions either. The Daily, Encounter, and At-will use of powers is easily comparable to a bunch of abilities you get in Final Fantasy Online for example, with cool-down timers and frequency of use.My characters in Mass Effect have cooldown timers, too - guess 4e must be video gamey! Or, maybe, Mass Effect must be MMO: The Video Game!
My characters in 3.5 have daily powers! Those are like cooldowns! Must be an MMO!
The issue is not with the fact that mechanical similarities exist between tabletop games and certain video games. That is beyond dispute. The issue is with the idea that this is unique to a particular tabletop game, or that the mechanic is unique to MMOs.
You can't call 4e MMO: The Roleplaying Game without applying that same standard to other roleplaying games, and other mediums of entertainment. The entire comparison crumbles under any kind of close examination. It's a meaningless way of comparing things, and the worst part is that it's usually used to make a certain game appear in a negative light while ignoring the ways that the same comparison could be used to make the speaker's game of choice appear in that same negative light.
We can really, really stop drawing meaningless comparisons like this. It's not hard. There are other things that actually merit discussion.
Scott,
I mention several different video game RPG's/MMO's, and I even make several mentions of other editions. I didn't even say anything negative about 4e; in fact, I said several things it does well. Tone it down or I'm flagging your posts. The rest of us are having a conversation, you're getting all up-in-arms over nothing.
We can really, really stop drawing meaningless comparisons like this. It's not hard. There are other things that actually merit discussion.
Read the title of the thread. Stop looking for implied edition wars where there are none. If you can't handle a non-4e fan making even the slightest mention of it, or anyone not portraying it as the gift of the gods you think it is, then you are incapable of having this discussion.
... "D&D? But isn't that for nerds?"
...
He's playing WoW.
LOL
That's rich.
It's less about what you consider fun, but if you're the sort who enjoys overcoming truly monumental gameplay challenges that demand utter mastery of the game, those raids are incredibly fun and rewarding.
I'd have to say, in a thread about MMO Players being suspected of/defended against claims of ruining tabletop forever (yes, it's hyperbole, but that's the point), the subjective value that is fun is relevant to each and every individual. Think of it as an auto-prefacing of YMMV if this disconcerts you. And at no point did I say raiding isn't fun, at all - my specific grievance is at the demand for 'mastery'. I mean, not to denigrate, but...seriously? I used to treat arcade fighting games as SERIOUS BUSINESS™, so the MMO version shouldn't seem so off-putting, and yet here we are. I suppose one could say the same of competitive circle-strafing...er, I mean PVP...where it amounts to differing tastes.
Er...how?
A realm-first kill is a noteworthy accomplishment. Because of the nature of the constraints placed on guilds purely by virtue of the realm they play on, being the first to down a boss is a pretty solid indication that you represent the most skillful, most dedicated players that realm has to offer.
In other words, it's nothing at all like hopping into a thread to shout "FIRST!"
Step 1: farm content until eyes bleed.
Step 2: arrange for days off from work/call in sick with advent of latest expansion packStep 3: buy the online copy so you can be ready to drop in as soon as expansion goes live
Step 4: marathon levelbinge
Step 5: lolraid while everyone less 'hardcore' is at work
Step 6: ???
Step 7: waggle throbbing purple virtual tackle and get serverwide announcement
Timing camping FTL
Right, clearly raiding isn't your style. That's fine. Casual players certainly make up the majority of the WoW player base.
First off, a bowl of core-hound leavings for you. Secondly...
But there's a difference between preferring casual play and calling a game mindless because you elect not to involve yourself in the more challenging aspects of the game.
I mean, if you played chess against nothing but four year-olds, you'd probably find it mindless, too.
There's a rather vast difference between being 'casual' and having other obligations outside of the game. Raiding is about experiencing the content, downing the bosses, and having the achievements to accompany the in-character lore. Just because you think it's a big deal to have dropped Illidan/Arthas/lolwhaleshark before everyone else doesn't mean everyone else's kills of same are somehow less valid. It's that very attitude of elitism and self-aggrandizement that is EXACTLY like being the 'FURSTPOASTROFL' bint that contributes nothing save ego and antagonism to an experience...and a major contribution towards players of a similar bent being as welcome as a deuce in the proverbial punch bowl.
Seriously, what next, we're going to discuss who was first to take out Mike Tyson back in the NES days?
The evil internet fairys ate my post.[/quite]
That's 'cause they're actually quasits, but that's a discussion for another time.
There was a long post here about me doing raids and being ostracized by the part of the WoW community that is comprised of uncivil idiots for having sub-optimal trinkets. I also mentioned that there were also civil, polite and helpful players.
Also I did top-tier raids, never a realm first I'm afraid, but I did them. Got boring after say sixth time we did the same raid for gear.
And for the end, if an MMO player asks me to play in my game, i will, of course let him, and guide him down the role-play path. New blood is good as it expands the player/GM pool.
So all who want to play this wonderful game, welcome!
Which is commendable and comes back to the attitude that *company name* was intending in regards to their myriad changes to stats, gear, talent trees, et al - bring the player, not the class.
The biggest problem I've seen is that more people are instead bringing the standard raider view to the table top; "X roles, NO X CLASS, X MIN DPS OR KICK, PST".
Beyond the one feature 4E defender classes have in regards to marking a target, the comparison of 4E or Pathfinder to MMOs are on equal ground. It is just a matter of preference on how often the abilities, powers, etc. refresh based on daily use, 5 minutes, rounds, or at-wills. But if you want to add 4E supporters to the group of MMO players you won't tolerate in your gaming group, then don't let me disuade you.
|
|
Beyond the one feature 4E defender classes have in regards to marking a target, the comparison of 4E or Pathfinder to MMOs are on equal ground. It is just a matter of preference on how often the abilities, powers, etc. refresh based on daily use, 5 minutes, rounds, or at-wills. But if you want to add 4E supporters to the group of MMO players you won't tolerate in your gaming group, then don't let me disuade you.
I have no problem having 4e or MMO players at my table, as long as they realize that we are playing Pathfinder and not the other things. If we have that understanding, there is no problem.
I agree Hama, and I would expect the same if I was playing GURPS, 4E, or similar systems, because it would not be courteous to the players or the DM if you keep on stating you really like another game (including a MMO). Everyone would question why you are at the table. But I would also add RPGs have to adapt and try to evolve just like MMOs. So as long as the RPG community keeps on introducing new ideas, and remains innovative, there is hope.
I agree Hama, and I would expect the same if I was playing GURPS, 4E, or similar systems, because it would not be courteous to the players or the DM if you keep on stating you really like another game (including a MMO). Everyone would question why you are at the table. But I would also add RPGs have to adapt and try to evolve just like MMOs. So as long as the RPG community keeps on introducing new ideas, and remains innovative, there is hope.
Our main Pathfinder game has players who actively play several MMO's and 4e on different nights. All are welcome who want to participate!
Seriously, just be a smart, happy, welcoming community. Then girls might want to play with us.
Well, yar... of course.
Trying to tie the whole 4E conversation back into the original topic, with all due respect, Pathfinder and 4E are not on the same footing in regards to MMO comparisons. To someone who plays and is familiar with both systems, they might be, but for everyone else, the presentation of the ruleset and the system as a whole matters because for a lot of new players or players who for whatever reason are only familiar with one of the systems but not the other, that is the first thing they see, and first impressions are hard to overcome. They don't see the ruleset in action, they see it descrbed on a webpage or the page of a book.
Despite what some people may like, WOW, or some similar game, in casual play mode tends to be the default benchmark when discussing MMOs. With that benchmark, 4E "looks" like a more similar system than Pathfinder. The way the rules are laid out, the way the system as a whole is described, it simply comes across as being more closer to that benchmark than Pathfinder. Those playing more complex games like EVE will see similarities between Pathfinder and those MMOs, but even with EVE's great success, it is still a niche market compared to the Everquest/WOW line of MMOs that dominate the market. Raiding may provide a different experience in those games, but most of the people playing MMOs aren't raiders, so again you are talking about a niche market. Same with PVPers in MMOs, who are also more likely to enjoy the team cooperation concept; they are there, but they only make up a small percentage of the total number of players.
This is a double edged sword for both systems. 4E is more likely to get a lot of new players from the MMO market, but those players are going to be sitting down with more pre conceived ideas of what 4E is that may or may not mesh well with what 4E actually is. Pathfinder is less likely to draw that crowd in, except for those who are playing the more complex MMOs like EVE, but the ones they do get are more likely to be open minded about what to expect.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Before you post, make sure you're posting in the right thread.