Will there ever be a D&D 4th edition cRPG?

There were tons of AD&D Games and several D&D3/3.5 games. Yet I haven't heard of a single 4th edition project. Were D&D 4th less exciting? Is it because developers do not want to make cRPG's anymore? Do you think there will be a 4th edition cRPG or not?

In the fullness of time, all things come to those who wait!!

I think D&D 4th edition is a disaster... for PnP gaming. It's clearly engineered specifically to be easily translatable to a computer. D&D 3 is much more free-form, and therefore much trickier to balance on a computer -- and there'll always be something left out.

I've got the books, but I'm not using them. Come to think of it, I should probably just sell them, no point in having them take up valuable shelf space that could otherwise be used for comic books...

In our pnp group including 3 engineers I am still known as the master of systems. They come naturally to me. I can often pinpoint strategies and holes on my first read. I tried to GM 3.5 once and I couldn't handle it. A decent grasp of the player's handbook and the DM guide and first bit of monsters manual is good to be able to memorize, not to mention the setting like forgotten realms. I found 3rd edition to almost require a computer. I struggled hard and in the end it fell apart because I couldn't keep track of all the rules. I specifically remember the time it took to figure out how magic arrows work. And with the tons of spells and feats...

There's the rub -- D&D3 isn't really a system; it's more like a combination of very, very simple and fluid base mechanics with a humongous pile of flourishes. I think it lends itself very well to "free-form" gaming, where the emphasis is on role-playing, narrative, description, and exploration, and rules are treated more like guidelines and a framework for character development than a consistent, balanced, structured system. Since that's precisely the kind of campaign I like to run, I really like it. I can handle just about anything by assigning it a challenge rating and then getting the players to figure it out, using their skills or, if available, magic.

However, there have been some sessions where I like to do more structured, tactical gaming as well, and in those cases I've had to make up my own rules, more or less -- or, alternatively, do a fair bit of "research" to figure out how to apply the ones in the books. If you do a lot of that sort of thing, it'll work really badly, I'm sure.

Is really D&D make selling more CRPG? It could be the best set of rules if it doesn't achieve this nobody will want pay a fee for using a complex set of rules not really adapted to a computer game.

For me D&D is a negative trademark, for sure we got ton of great or good D&D CRPG along the history of CRPG but for computer gaming it has many very bad design. The core of this flaw are:

• Totally wrong approach of fighters, Diablo show how approach such classes, the general idea.
• The rest system involves too many limits and constraints, regeneration based systems are much more easy to adapt to various design.
• The balance between magic and non magic is based on number of spell casting limit, meaning that any D&D game is cursed to a very high unbalance when characters reach higher levels.
• The classes design has become an incredible obscure garbage that no computer game will ever be able to present in a comprehensive way, even wiki have hard time to do such job.

Prime Junta said:

However, there have been some sessions where I like to do more structured, tactical gaming as well, and in those cases I've had to make up my own rules, more or less — or, alternatively, do a fair bit of "research" to figure out how to apply the ones in the books. If you do a lot of that sort of thing, it'll work really badly, I'm sure.

Click to expand...

Yeah I mildly see the problem (never played as a master and only a little bit as a player and never D&D, only Lovecraft based and Start Wars). But is a merging of Pen and Paper and handled with assistant and wifi would not be able to solve such problem?

Well I mean Pen and Paper translated to Handled with assistant and wifi, everyone has a handled or the master has one, and players share one or more.

EDIT: I bet there's already that on computer with a net but probably not yet on handled and handled could change a bit the point of view.

Last I heard Atari were being sued by Hasbro over their use of the D&D licence. Until that dispute is resolved I can't see there being any more D&D games.

http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/ddonline/news.html?sid=6243795

Nobody likes or even wants 4. Seriously, Ive seen nothing but downright contempt for it! Announcing a game based on D&D IV is like releasing a new Doors cd w/ the latest teen sensation on vocals.

That said, it's probably the most suited for adaptation to crpg and wouldnt be any worse than any other action-rpg.

I personally prefer 3.5, it's the right blend for me. If we want to take it down to the nitty gritty wargaming level, it will facilitate that. Otherwise, Ive found it to be a smooth flowing system. If you know the rules and are playing w/ others who do ='.'=

xSamhainx said:

Nobody likes or even wants 4. Seriously, Ive seen nothing but downright contempt for it! Announcing a game based on D&D IV is like releasing a new Doors cd w/ the latest teen sensation on vocals.

Click to expand...

That's funny, because everybody I know (outside of the Internet, that is) who's played it liked it. The system is better balanced than earlier verisions, where some classes were plain better than other classes and some races were plain better than other races. The character creation system is varied, and I think experimenting with different builds would be quite fun if it was done in a cRPG (Tabletop gaming doesn't really work for this). The combat system is well designed, power system well. It's big weaknes (and I can really see why this is a deal breaker for some pepole) is that it really encourages prioritizing fighting and rule crunching over roleplaying.

But, if I'm really critical, I've seen one cRPG that doesn't do this (Planescape:Torment). So D&D 4.0 would fit PC gaming like a glove. Heck, if NWN2 had been 4.0 rather than 3.5 I might even have liked the main campaign instead of hating it because of all the boring fighting.

Übereil

Ubereil said:

That's funny, because everybody I know (outside of the Internet, that is) who's played it liked it.

Click to expand...

Maybe it's kind of an Generations thing ?

I don't care for 4th edition, so I don't care

You got it all wrong. See, up to 3.5 D&D was a fantasy *world* simulator, so computer games could use its system. But 4th edition is a fantasy *game* simulator, so having a game simulate a game simulator is kind of a paradox. The fabric of the space time continuum could be torn apart if that happened.

Well, the arrival of 4e D&D meant that no 3.5e licenses will be handed out anymore. In other words, you can be certain of it that the next D&D game will be based on 4e.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

Maybe it's kind of an Generations thing ?

Click to expand...

The pepole I play with are mostly 30+ years old and have played tabletop RPG's since their early teens.

Übereil

I've heard either contempt, or apathy for 4E. Either it's hated, or no one cares. I've never found anyone who liked it specifically though.

I do have the core books, but haven't really had a group to play with in a long while.

No one in my "personal circle" likes 4th edition - and I suppose we're talking ~10 PnP fans.

I know of people who adored it even before they played it, but I haven't really kept up my interest in terms of whether it stays that way today.

Personally, I think they did a lot of bad things going the mainstream MMO route - but it DOES make the game more approachable and definitely more suited for computer conversion. The thing is, it's no good making a computer version of a system that's ultimately boring and we've already got countless rigid systems.

I'm sticking with 3.5 for PnP - and I'm looking into Pathfinder at the moment.

DArtagnan said:

The thing is, it's no good making a computer version of a system that's ultimately boring and we've already got countless rigid systems.

Click to expand...

What's so boring about it?

Übereil

Ubereil said:

What's so boring about it?

Übereil

Click to expand...

Speaking subjectively:

The class system.

Rigid predefined roles and implicit powers, limited multiclassing, artificial concepts like "Tank, DPS, Support" - things of that nature.

I'll admit, I haven't actually PLAYED the game, but to be honest I don't think I need to. I'm sure it's great fun in terms of a streamlined experience - but the actual meat of the system - which to me always was the character development aspect - seems severely curtailed.

It is streamlined into each class being focused on certain roles, rather than the more free-form 3.5 system (where you could just take feats or take a level or two of a class that has the skills you need, followed by a PrC which further developed those skills). Instead, a Fighter is pretty much a Fighter, a Warlord is a Warlord, etc...

The Powers system is interesting, but at a glance it appears that the difference between a Mage and a Fighter is in thematics and range; Fighter "Powers" look more like spells geared towards a front-line magi, than abilities a Fighter would pick up. It does give the system a greater balance, but then they had a supplement in 3.5 which went a long way to balancing things out with the martial classes vs casters.

This is, of course, without playtesting it. So there could be some differences that a glance wouldn't tell. At a glance, however, I see nowhere that it is significantly different playing a Mage from a Fighter, and that is somewhat insane.

And then there are no Druids. At least in the core 3. Or Gnomes. How am I supposed to load catapults with no Gnomes to put in the baskets?

I think it's telling that we have at least one (poorly balanced from what I've read) 3.5e rulebook released that at least partially is because people don't like 4E. Then again, I remember the firestorm around 3E when it came out, and the 2E/AD&D players despised it, among the reasons being that it was "too much like a video game". Then an almost greater firestorm over 3.5E, which was seen by some as a means to bilk people out of money (never mind most of the core changes are available in the SRD for free).

I'm sure when 5E comes out in some years, there'll be a firestorm over it as well. And 6E and 7E etc.

My thought is, the 3.5 books are still readily available on Amazon; go buy them and play it instead. I've been planning on picking up some of the ones I never got around to before. Particularly, the rest of the Compendiums (I love having the Spell Compendium handy. So much more convenient). If the demand is great enough for 3.x style books, then people will make and sell 3.x style books. Even if Wizards won't. Pathfinder is proof of this.