Will this game kick off a new wave of DND games?

[Dadalama]

I'm kind of partial to 5th edition as far as D&D goes. But at the end of the day I am a GURPS/Runequest player.

[Dadalama]

 

I would like to see someone finally make a crpg using GURPS or some other rpg system without climbing HP. Last one I remember was Drakensang and it's prequel.

 

Drakensang and it's prequel use The Dark Eye -rpg system. Which has climbing health (if you mean that you get more health during level ups), although it also has wounding system that allows killing high health character's without need to take characters vitality to zero. I don't remember if Drakensang had some alternations for this system.

 

I am also little confused about OP's message, as PoE don't use D&D, even though it uses lots of similar mechanics. And most of the D&D games that come out after NWN were already in production before it come out or they were add-ons to NWN. Although there were NWN2 and Dungeons & Dragons Online several years later.

 

Now that you mention it, yes Drakensang did get vit boosts per level (though The Dark Eye didn't). Drakensang was otherwise pretty close but it used some of the rules we never got stateside iirc. But the best thing about TDE was the character creation, which Drakensang left out.

[Sedrefilos]

There's already a DnD game coming to pcs
 

https://swordcoast.com/

[Luckmann]

Really? Many people were seriously put off by 2nd Ed AD&D. I was one of them. The franchise collapsed under munchkinism, splat-books and the Forgotten-bloody-Realms. Lorraine Williams / TSR / hubris / collapse...

 

2nd Ed AD&D killed the game. 3rd Ed resurrected it.

 

But I liiiiiike the Forgotten Realms. D:

 

 

Well. Liked.

 

 

 

D&D3 is only any good compared to AD&D.

* sigh * And, in other news, some people prefer the slightly astringent, fresh-sour taste of a green apple to the sweet, sharply citrus tang of the orange.

 

Granny Smith > Pink Lady. Green apples are superior to red apples.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Luckmann

[Luckmann]

Edit: Goddammit, second double-post of today, what is wrong with me?

Edited April 18, 2015 by Luckmann

[Vadász]

A DnD game with the new ruleset could really work since it's not that different from 2nd edition.

 

What I actually would love a Pathfinder game, but i fear that Paizo will force them to use their setting and i kinda find it to be a low quality politically correct clone of Forgotten Realms.

[Nexus0]

I uh, had no idea that was a hot topic.

[Mk1]

We will at least get a pathfinder crpg in the future at least. Sounds like paizo wants "many" of them lol.

 

Pathfinder *is* the closest thing to "real" D&D these days, and Obsidian has that license...

 

If they stick close to the pen and paper mechanics, whatever game they make will basically be the new D&D CRPG, because the mechanics of Pathfinder are 90% the same as those they based NWN 2 on.

[Mk1]

 

D&D3 is only any good compared to AD&D.

It's the best of the D&D, by far. Of course it's worthless tripe compared to half the other PnP's out there. I have a special place in my heart for D&D, but is far from the best system...or even a particularly good one, really.

 

 

D&D 3E (or Pathfinder for that matter, since it's basically the same thing) might have serious flaws... but they're still a hell of a lot better, in terms of ruleset, than *any* non-action CRPG for which the designers made the rules from scratch. That I know of, anyway.

 

And while I'll readily admit that there are tons of pen and paper RPGs that are better designed (theoretically) than 3E or Pathfinder, or that are vastly more ambitious in terms of exploring different ways to game, in practice they all require so much more DM skill or are so foreign conceptually to most people, that a lot of the time they turn out to be vastly less enjoyable than an evening of D&D-ish hack-and-slash.

[Vadász]

D&D 3E (or Pathfinder for that matter, since it's basically the same thing) might have serious flaws... but they're still a hell of a lot better, in terms of ruleset, than *any* non-action CRPG for which the designers made the rules from scratch. That I know of, anyway.

 

While i don't like it's "feel" i believe 4e DnD to be a better system for CRPGS than 3e/PF.

[sparklecat]

 

D&D 3E (or Pathfinder for that matter, since it's basically the same thing) might have serious flaws... but they're still a hell of a lot better, in terms of ruleset, than *any* non-action CRPG for which the designers made the rules from scratch. That I know of, anyway.

 

While i don't like it's "feel" i believe 4e DnD to be a better system for CRPGS than 3e/PF.

 

Yeah, they really ought to have tried a 4e CRPG; it seems pretty well suited.  More gamey, less simulationist than previous editions, I gather.

[Mk1]

I would like to see someone finally make a crpg using GURPS or some other rpg system without climbing HP. Last one I remember was Drakensang and it's prequel.

 

I'd like that too, in theory, but it's completely impractical, and would result in a terrible CRPG. For several reasons.

 

One is that GURPS looks great on paper, but I've yet to meet a single person capable of running a truly good GURPS game. It's a system that's absolutely hopeless when you only use the basic rules, but no one ever bothers to master the full ruleset because there's a ton of rules and they're dry and not much fun.

 

The second major one is that GURPS is a horrible fit for CRPG combat... because computer games tend to have a lot of it, which in GURPS will get you killed in very short order.  GURPS combat is only fun (IMO) when it's rare and you play it smart to use tactics to make it highly survivable for your side - or, in other words, horribly unfair for the opposition. But most people who run GURPS don't get that, and simply throw fights at you like it's %$#@!&* D&D, and then have a stupid/surprised look on their face when 3 out of 4 of the PCs end up crippled halfway through the adventure... because it's just not exciting unless at least one PC gets shot in every fight.

 

Third, if you make it true to the pen and paper rules, it'll either need to be the most open-ended game ever that allows the highest number of possible solutions to every quest, or it will be the most frustrating game ever - because in GURPS, there are 1001 ways to design a character that will be completely useless at "conventional" adventuring.

 

Fourth, let's not even pretend you could implement GURPS advantages / disadvantages in a sane and balanced manner...

Edited April 18, 2015 by Mk1

[HoonDing]

I wished for more Dragonlance games until I looked up whatever happened to the setting after Dragons of Summer Flame.

[Mk1]

 

D&D 3E (or Pathfinder for that matter, since it's basically the same thing) might have serious flaws... but they're still a hell of a lot better, in terms of ruleset, than *any* non-action CRPG for which the designers made the rules from scratch. That I know of, anyway.

 

While i don't like it's "feel" i believe 4e DnD to be a better system for CRPGS than 3e/PF.

 

 

I disagree that 4E is better since I actually like games like NWN 2 that did a good implementation of the 3E system - but if we're talking about the system used in COMPUTER games, then yeah, 4E is probably still better than anything to date, including PoE.

 

And it's not really so crazy, is it?

 

In pen and paper games, all the designers have to make is the system, and that's hard enough. In a CRPG, they have to make the rpg system and a ridiculously complex piece of software (while trying not to imitate published RPG mechanic in ways that will get them sued) - small wonder they don't do as well when it comes to the game mechanics.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Mk1

[illathid]

4e D&D is best D&D (and I've played every edition going back to 1e AD&D). However they are all a steaming pile of horse dung when compared to FATE.

[PrimeJunta]

For a moment there I thought you said FATAL.

[Dadalama]

 

I would like to see someone finally make a crpg using GURPS or some other rpg system without climbing HP. Last one I remember was Drakensang and it's prequel.

 

I'd like that too, in theory, but it's completely impractical, and would result in a terrible CRPG. For several reasons.

 

One is that GURPS looks great on paper, but I've yet to meet a single person capable of running a truly good GURPS game. It's a system that's absolutely hopeless when you only use the basic rules, but no one ever bothers to master the full ruleset because there's a ton of rules and they're dry and not much fun.

 

The second major one is that GURPS is a horrible fit for CRPG combat... because computer games tend to have a lot of it, which in GURPS will get you killed in very short order.  GURPS combat is only fun (IMO) when it's rare and you play it smart to use tactics to make it highly survivable for your side - or, in other words, horribly unfair for the opposition. But most people who run GURPS don't get that, and simply throw fights at you like it's %$#@!&* D&D, and then have a stupid/surprised look on their face when 3 out of 4 of the PCs end up crippled halfway through the adventure... because it's just not exciting unless at least one PC gets shot in every fight.

 

Third, if you make it true to the pen and paper rules, it'll either need to be the most open-ended game ever that allows the highest number of possible solutions to every quest, or it will be the most frustrating game ever - because in GURPS, there are 1001 ways to design a character that will be completely useless at "conventional" adventuring.

 

Fourth, let's not even pretend you could implement GURPS advantages / disadvantages in a sane and balanced manner...

 

I've run GURPS many times before. I think I'm quite a good GM. But it's not for everyone.

 

How it would be done in a videogame is you'd cherry pick the right skills, advantages and disadvantages for the game. Or you would use templates to create a "soft class" effect. But regardless, the point wasn't about GURPS itself. It was about having a game where you can't take 50 arrows to the crotch and walk away. That isn't done often in rpgs, I'd like to see it done more.

I can go on about how GURPS isn't like you say it is but I'm sure you don't care. Just suffice to say I wasn't necessarily talking about GURPS specifically. I just used it as an example of a game that doesn't have scaling upward scaling HP.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Dadalama

[Volourn]

"Gaming companies noticed the success of this game without a doubt."

 

The gaming publishers don't give a crap about a game that may or not reach a million sales, buddy. They'd look at the million sales and laugh it off.

[Monte Carlo]

For a moment there I thought you said FATAL.

 

Ha ha ha you've done it now. You've said it, and it has been summoned

 

Gamers younger than us, pure of heart and stout of soul, are about to be sullied and ruined as they tap that cursed acronym into Google. Damn your eyes, PJ, damn your eyes!

[Katarack21]

"Gaming companies noticed the success of this game without a doubt."

 

The gaming publishers don't give a crap about a game that may or not reach a million sales, buddy. They'd look at the million sales and laugh it off.

Sales aren't actually what they care about. Sales are a factor in deciding what they care about; that being profits. PoE may only make a million sales, but they also may generate profits up to *twice* what it cost to make the game.

[illathid]

 

For a moment there I thought you said FATAL.

 

Ha ha ha you've done it now. You've said it, and it has been summoned

 

Gamers younger than us, pure of heart and stout of soul, are about to be sullied and ruined as they tap that cursed acronym into Google. Damn your eyes, PJ, damn your eyes!

 

 

I remember the guy on the forums here a few months back who basically wanted PoE to work like FATAL. :D

[Elgyn]

"Gaming companies noticed the success of this game without a doubt."

 

The gaming publishers don't give a crap about a game that may or not reach a million sales, buddy. They'd look at the million sales and laugh it off.

That's not true at all.

 

It's much like the movies. If Movie A makes 30 million off a 3 million budget, the studios take notice. If Movie B makes 150 million off a 100 million budget, a lot of times they shelve that franchise. 

 

As for the DnD edition wars, I won't really get into that. Sword Coast Legends is going to live or die by how good it's story is. If the story is good, it won't matter if it's a bastard version of 5E or not. 

[Nexus0]

well, if anything, from a non-table top player point of view. Id like to see a POE expansion, epic, along the tune of IWD2. Less open world, but still with some sidequesting and a straightforward challenge.

[Volourn]

"Sales aren't actually what they care about. Sales are a factor in deciding what they care about; that being profits. PoE may only make a million sales, but they also may generate profits up to *twice* what it cost to make the game."

 

 

"That's not true at all.

It's much like the movies. If Movie A makes 30 million off a 3 million budget, the studios take notice. If Movie B makes 150 million off a 100 million budget, a lot of times they shelve that franchise."
 

WRONG. They doc are about sales. It's why they brag about them all the time.  They don't care about a million sales unelss you can show that there is a way to make that million sales into 10 million sales.

 

At the level of publishers,  a game that sells a mil copies just won't be profitable above. They don't want a profit of a few million. They want MILLIONS OF PROFITS.

[Trand]

I love D&D but if I get more solid RPG's like pillars I don't care if it Faerun, Middle Earth or Azeorth. Just as long as it has great game play and a solid story. I don't care where it is.