ince I was about twelve, I've harbored loves for two distinct pastimes: pencil-and-paper roleplaying and video games. Generally, the two catered to different needs: on the one hand, traditional roleplaying games allowed me to be creative, crafting immense worlds for my friends to explore; on the other, video games provided a mindless escape from the day-to-day with fantasies that were instantly gratifying. To this very day, I still toy with both hobbies. It was just last year that a group of friends suggested starting up a Dungeons & Dragons campaign via the internet — feeling a little bit exhausted by frequent bouts of World of Warcraft, I leapt at the opportunity. After all: pencil-and-paper gaming was its own beast, able to provide an experience that was completely different from that of the modern fantasy MMO.
Pencil-and-paper gaming can provide an experience completely different from an MMO — or so I thought.Or so I thought. Times have changed since I picked up my first Player's Handbook back in 1993 — the Dungeons and Dragons line now rests in the hands of a new publisher, Wizards of the Coast, and they seem determined to bring pencil and paper gaming into the MMO era. Short of defining wizards as a "DPS" class with many area-of-effect spells at their disposal, the writers behind Dungeons & Dragons' fourth edition have clearly placed their focus on combat. Gone are the days when a ranger may have to describe to the gamemaster what they intended on doing with their longbow. Instead, they merely need to say: "I'm going to use my two-fanged strike ability," and the GM knows to add x to a die roll. While I'm certain this focus on rules is a joy for some, I find it to be about as creative as pressing my 6-key, thus casting a "mind blast" spell. That is to say: where's the roleplaying?
When Gary Gygax and his collaborators first set about creating the game that would become Dungeons & Dragons, their intention was to shift tabletop gaming's focus from the army to the man — what began as an expansion to a fantasy wargame's ruleset quickly evolved into a game that centered around individuals and the assumption of a new persona. While miniatures were sometimes used to illustrate character placement or the scale of an adversary, they were usually frowned upon as being regressive — roleplaying games were meant to be played in the theater of the mind, not over hex tables with meticulously painted miniatures.
I once asked myself: Why on Earth would anyone play anything besides Dungeons & Dragons? Now I know.As the years went by and commercial realities set in, Dungeons & Dragons' treatment of miniatures changed, but up through the game's second and third editions, they were merely suggested and never required. In the game's present state, it would be nearly impossible to play without a stable of pewter props and premade map sheets — how else would a gamemaster be able to keep track of the "tank's" location relative to the "healer"? Was I being too hard on this latest version of the world's most recognized roleplaying game? Admittedly, but there had to be others out there who felt as I did — players who wanted to keep their two pastimes separate and distinct.
I can still remember standing in a bookstore back in 1993, my Player's Handbook clutched close to my chest. As I looked around at the other roleplaying games on the shelf, I stopped and asked myself: "Why on Earth would anyone play anything besides Dungeons & Dragons?" Well, young Ed, now you know. There are a great many games in this world, and there are a great many ways in which to play them. Wizards of the Coast has created a product that caters beautifully to the analytic gamer — the player who wants to vanquish foes without giving a great deal of thought as to their motivation. Countering this model are publishers like Paizo. Their new Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (which is basically a retooling of Wizard's own third edition Dungeon & Dragons rules) clearly focuses on storytelling: combat might be the means to an end, but it is never the end itself.
Was there a point to this rant? Only that for as much as I obsess over World of Warcraft, even I need a break every now and again. It's good to know that pencil and paper gaming lives on as an outlet for creativity, problem solving and fun, even if it's going by a different name these days. Keep on playing folks, whatever your game.
I couldn't even imagine trying to level a character in 4th edition the old-fashioned way. As a subscriber to Wizards of the Coast's D&D Insider program, I received access to a computer application that automatically leveled characters and filled out character sheets. There were simply too many options for character abilities and skills in this version of the game. Keeping track of that much information just wasn't realistic...
All I can say: thank you Paizo!
Wow. You really have no idea how 4e works, do you? You specify your attack power and "the GM knows to add x to a die roll"?!? This makes no sense.
If you play 4E without roleplaying, UR DOIN IT WRONG.
I feel exactly the same way about 4e, the "powers" describe actions so specifically that they take out the personal touch to how you describe your characters actions. That is a pretty good summation of how 4e limits role playing opportunities. I've heard that the PHB3 is going to add a bunch of "skill powers" which will put a limit on RP opportunities outside of combat as well.
@Ed Kirchgessner the sheer number of powers in just the first PHB is truly overwhelming, and with each power source splatbook being so necessary to play there are too many to sort through without a computer program.
"If you play 4E without roleplay, UR DOIN IT WRONG." - QFT.
Some people see the new ruleset and for some reason, feel that they can't roleplay while using it. I don't understand where this barrier comes from. I am not an expert on older editions, but I know at least 3.x never supported role playing with the rulebooks. All of that came from the players, and the DM, who supplied it themselves. They used the rules to build a skeleton of a character, and then layered on the muscle and skin with a healthy dose of their imagination. That hasn't seemed to change to me.
I question if the lack of roleplaying in your game was due to the rules, or due to the DM and players.
@Katallos - One thing I can't wrap my head around is where you get the idea that your RolePlaying options is limited. What is stopping you from describing your actions how you want? Just because there is descriptive text doesn't mean you have to follow it exactly. Make up your own description, and make the game your own.
From the article: "Gone are the days when a ranger may have to describe to the gamemaster what they intended on doing with their longbow. Instead, they merely need to say: "I'm going to use my two-fanged strike ability," and the GM knows to add x to a die roll."
Well, I suppose its true that you don't 'have' to describe what your character is doing. You can play the game just fine by calling out the name of the attack power you are using, then the numbers and seeing if you hit or missed. But that doesn't mean that you can't add your own descriptions.
Personally, I find it more enjoyable to describe how my ranger draws out a specially crafted arrow, takes careful aim at the orc across the battlefield, and holds his breath for just a moment before he releases the string, and watches the arrow fly. Because of its special construction, the arrow splits into two separate projectiles midflight. I exhale just before each finds its mark in the orc's shoulder and chest, and draw my next arrow from the quiver, looking for my next target.
And nothing in 4th edition stops me from doing exactly that.
I went into a Barnes and Noble last summer to check out the books. With zero knowledge of the new rules and having read no reviews or heard any opinions, I too came to the conclusion that the writers were trying to cash in on the success of WoW and turn D&D into a tabletop version of the MMO. After about 2 hours of reading and browsing, I put them back on the shelf with great disappointment.
The rules of AD&D, especially 2nd edition, are crazy and convoluted. But the books are written in a way so as to suggest the rules- emphasis is on the creation and imagination of your character. The old books were a pleasure just to read through and let your mind run wild with possibilities. With the 4e books I felt constricted- like I was reading a rules manual. There was no creative spark.
I have so many good memories of great campaigns and great people I played them with. I'm fortunate to have those memories as a foundation for any future gaming. I fear that the kids growing up on the new rules are truly missing the essence of what D&D is.
I address this issue in my own blog, here:
https://4egaming.wordpress.com/2009/08/09/the-dumbest-argument-against-4e/
The fact that 4e seems to have no roleplaying is usually something I hear from people who a) haven't played it for a long time or play with a battle-hungry group and b) people who play with a DM that doesn't build roleplaying opportunities into the scenario. These are the fault of the DM and players, not the system.
I share your disappointment, Ed. My purchase of the 4th Edition Player's Handbook and the sessions we ran during the summer confirmed the strongest criticisms of the game.
Not only does Wizards of the Coast's source material deprive new players of inspiration and guidance on how to roleplay, the rules themselves preclude imaginative and original use of a character.
D&D is a tabletop game, now; a well-crafted one, but it is what it is.