D&D Daggerdale - Interview @ Eurogamer

BillSeurer said:

The paper game franchise has been in decline since they abandoned 3.5e. The 4e rules were meant to appeal more to on-line gamers and such and lost a huge amount of the fan support they had gained by doing 3/3.5.

Actually, you could probably argue that D&D has gone downhill since Hasbro bought out Wizards of the Coast.

Click to expand...

Yeah I remember an article were it said why they changed the rules. It was basically to appeal to new gamers and be able to use it more in games. That and the sales were falling. As I said the new neverwinter doesn't appeal to me as I loathe MMO'S.
I know its not a traditional MMO but you still have to play on there servers. I gotta wonder why Atari picked cryptic and not someone else.

Couchpotato said:

I gotta wonder why Atari picked cryptic and not someone else.

Click to expand...

Because they were willing to do an action game in the first place ?

Of course this is nothing but speculation ... But the signs of the current fashion in gaming are all over the place ...

Couchpotato said:

I gotta wonder why Atari picked cryptic and not someone else.

Click to expand...

I would have thought that was obvious. They own Cryptic and they have extensive online experience. Why would you think they would use anyone else?

Dhruin said:

I would have thought that was obvious. They own Cryptic and they have extensive online experience. Why would you think they would use anyone else?

Click to expand...

I didn't want an mmo and since they did well I have no faith in Cryptic based on there track record.

I don't think any of us want an MMO. I didn't realise your question really meant "I don't like Cryptic" or I wouldn't have answered.

The problem with D&D is basically that it really doesn't need upgrading. You could grab a player's handbook of AD&D, good ol' character sheets and play today just like you played 25 years ago. It's not like rules become obsolete. So, they change rules so they can sell more books. They're not necessarily better, just different. I liked AD&D, but I liked D&D 3 better. But my 'house rule' was that you could only play classes/abilities, etc from the core 3 handbooks. I.E. no 'Warrior 3/Ranger 2/Divine Disciple 3/Dragon whatever 4/Celestial prostitute 5'.
Oh, and I replaced the magic item creation abilities with other stuff. I believe that contributed to the min/maxing a lot, players knew what items they could get (like keen/sharp/obsidian whatever so they took 2 levels of 'lunger devil' to end up with a crit range of 3-20). They only got what they found in their adventuring.
I tried reading the 4th edition manuals twice but ended up throwing up somewhere in the middle, both times!

Ovenall said:

One more thing about this:

My gut tells me that all the added complexity of the character system is what drives a lot of the other added complexities of game systems: the bottom line, or money. Sell more rule books, expansions, character sheets, monster manuals, etc.

But really, what the heck is a Red Dragon Disciple (just picking an example here) as a character? It's the end result of a bunch of accumulated stat points that forces (or at least greatly encourages) a person to "play backwards" in his head before starting just to eventually end up there. Make sure you have the right alignment first. Then level this class first, then multi- to this other class and take various skills and abilities along the way, just to reach some endpoint where you end up with some other abilities, which will unlock other abilities, etc., etc.

Not my bag.

Click to expand...

To be fair, prestige classes have been a part of the game since the late 70's. Its what separated AD&D from the original D&D system (aka Basic). Supplements developed in game then published in Dragon Magazine eventually found their way into hardcover books.

This was also true in the early CRPGs, Wizardry in particular.

One of the differences is was the randomness of those early systems because of the requirement to roll your character stats for the the purposes of realism: ie. you have to play with what life gives you, and your stats become a key roleplaying option.

--

On Nw(3) this being tied to their servers doesn't make anyone happy at all. To add the important building options Cryptic has taken away the ability to make items and probably scripting in order to keep balance across the board. Of course, you'll likely be able to buy a hackmaster...

--

Action D&D games? They've worked in the past. The argument to not have to use the name is silly. I've made this argument regarding why Bethsoft used the Fallout name.

wolfing said:

The problem with D&D is basically that it really doesn't need upgrading. You could grab a player's handbook of AD&D, good ol' character sheets and play today just like you played 25 years ago. It's not like rules become obsolete. So, they change rules so they can sell more books.

Click to expand...

You have that with every system, I guess.

And the TDE fan base says the 4th edition is DEFINITIVELY better than the third, because- for example - the elimination of chance (by rolling dice) in the character generation process.
There are fans who explicitely state that this is "more fair".

Me, I just like it the wa the 3rd edition is - but no-one would do a game for this anymore.
But on the other hand … If the mechanics of Drakensang could be changed too …

Idea would be a game that has two ngines :
- one for graphics representation
- one for the rules

With that, one could mod the rules to apply any desired rule set …

Sorry to become off-topic again …