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

[constantine]

I miss Faerun. I would be super happy to go on a new crpg adventure in that world.

 

The developers of the enhanced editions of BG1&2 and IWD are working to get the license to create a third instalment in the BG games.

 

Not good news as I see it. Although I am grateful to them for the enh. ed., any new content they added was almost trash and did not fit well at all with the original.

 

So I question how good that new BG will be.

[Dadalama]

 

I miss Faerun. I would be super happy to go on a new crpg adventure in that world.

 

The developers of the enhanced editions of BG1&2 and IWD are working to get the license to create a third instalment in the BG games.

 

Not good news as I see it. Although I am grateful to them for the enh. ed., any new content they added was almost trash and did not fit well at all with the original.

 

So I question how good that new BG will be.

 

Probably better than the main quest of NWN. Not saying much though. I much preferred 1 (mostly because the editor came with more content) but NWN 2 had far better main quests.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

At first I thought 5th edition D&D would be easy to translate to a CRPG, but when I think about it, it might actually be fairly difficult. While 5th editions mechanics are overall much more elegant and fluid than other editions, many of the "simplifications" it introduces would be difficult to translate. Reactions, many wizard class features, bard & rogue dice roll modifications, and more. It would by necessity have to be turn-based, but even then, imperfectly translated at best I think.

[Darkpriest]

What's wrong with turn based? I like turn based.... i wanna some TB goodness

Edited April 19, 2015 by Darkpriest

[Katarack21]

"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.

 

I can't even...

[Lmaoboat]

I heard 4e did horrible things to the Forgotten Realms setting. 

[constantine]

At first I thought 5th edition D&D would be easy to translate to a CRPG, but when I think about it, it might actually be fairly difficult. While 5th editions mechanics are overall much more elegant and fluid than other editions, many of the "simplifications" it introduces would be difficult to translate. Reactions, many wizard class features, bard & rogue dice roll modifications, and more. It would by necessity have to be turn-based, but even then, imperfectly translated at best I think.

D&D 5th is (imo) the best pen'n'paper D&D we've had so far, but I will have to disagree with you, I think it can be translated very well in a crpg. The combat mechanics are simple and solid enough. Class options and feats that are of a role-play nature can be omitted and should that break balance, they can give another ability instead.

[Varana]

Why should we use a PnP rule set for a CRPG, anyway?

 

The setting - sure. Be it Faerûn or Eberron or, for that matter, Numenéra.

 

But the rules?

Taking that as a cue - "simple combat mechanics" are exactly the thing that is completely unnecessary for a CRPG. With a computer, you can create ridiculously complicated and computationally intensive rules and still have your combat resolution in a fraction of a PnP fight.

You do not have, OTOH, any possibility of improvising. Anything that can happen in a CRPG has to be pre-planned and pre-programmed. Every social interaction or conflict has to be based on exact numbers and rules, while PnP rules can rely on the GM to a certain extent (and some do it more than others).

 

They're completely different mediums, and too close adherence to PnP rules, IMHO, is actually detrimental to video games.

 

But then, I didn't play much DnD where it seems to be more about the rules than about the setting, which seems odd to me. Rules are just a random way of conflict resolution; if they're not adequate, change them. What really matters to me, is setting.

[PrimeJunta]

There is a pretty strong "wargaming" tradition in PnP roleplaying too though. My campaigns are heavily story/setting oriented as well, but wargaming-RPG's can be a lot of fun too, and they do require solid mechanics for that. D&D4 would work pretty well for that style of game I think.

[Monte Carlo]

There is a pretty strong "wargaming" tradition in PnP roleplaying too though. My campaigns are heavily story/setting oriented as well, but wargaming-RPG's can be a lot of fun too, and they do require solid mechanics for that. D&D4 would work pretty well for that style of game I think.

 

I am the ex-wargamer grog of which you speak - Avalon Hill / Squad leader / SPI LotR wargames and into D&D then RuneQuest and Traveller / Twilight 2000.

 

People forget the first ever iteration of D&D was a miniatures game invented by a guy who liked Napoleonic and Civil War wargames with lead soldiers in his Lake Geneva basement. The very essence of D&D has always been infused with tactical wargaming. First it was deeply basic, as it was meant to be mass combat rules then it coalesced into this squad-based game.

 

Ever since the 1990s computer RPGs and their pen and paper forebears have had an interesting, symbiotic relationship despite the fact pen and paper rules are suboptimal for PC games (the spirit of them is not). For me the ultimate irony of this video-killed-the-radio-star situation was 4E D&D which was a PnP game copying MMORPG tropes.

 

For many of us (and WotC will acknowledge this) 4E sucked gangrenous donkey-balls.

 

There is no 'best' iteration of D&D for the computer because it's like trying to make ice-cream from onions - you could do it but it just wouldn't taste right. The essence of D&D however - a small party of colourful heroes with special powers, class-based with stats fighting monsters etc etc is (as we have seen) great for computer games.

 

I wish we'd just all acknowledge this and make a DnD engine for computer games designed for computer games. Trope heavy, specifics light.

[Celerion]

Al a like when Neverwinter Nights came out? I DND is a great system that was never fully intergrated for video games till Pillars came out.

I REALLY hope so, if not more DnD games, then hopefully more games from the Pillars of Eternity universe.

[Mk1]

Why should we use a PnP rule set for a CRPG, anyway?

 

The setting - sure. Be it Faerûn or Eberron or, for that matter, Numenéra.

 

But the rules?

Taking that as a cue - "simple combat mechanics" are exactly the thing that is completely unnecessary for a CRPG. With a computer, you can create ridiculously complicated and computationally intensive rules and still have your combat resolution in a fraction of a PnP fight.

You do not have, OTOH, any possibility of improvising. Anything that can happen in a CRPG has to be pre-planned and pre-programmed. Every social interaction or conflict has to be based on exact numbers and rules, while PnP rules can rely on the GM to a certain extent (and some do it more than others).

 

They're completely different mediums, and too close adherence to PnP rules, IMHO, is actually detrimental to video games.

 

But then, I didn't play much DnD where it seems to be more about the rules than about the setting, which seems odd to me. Rules are just a random way of conflict resolution; if they're not adequate, change them. What really matters to me, is setting.

 

Why use PnP rules? Well, I'm sort of repeating myself here, but I would say because writing good RPG rules is really, really hard, and CRPG designers are even worse at it than PnP RPG designers.

 

So going with a tried-and-true PnP system that (while still flawed) has been playtested for decades and thousands of people have commented about what parts of it work and which don't in excruciating detail will almost always work better than something hacked together while trying to get a computer game made.

 

At least if we're talking about party-based games with (in theory) tactical combat. Action games are their own animal...

[Xosmi]

Personally, it's not D&D i want to see return, just good cRPG's. 

Sure,  D&D is a good IP, offering a great deal of established lore, locations and settings and all that comes with it, but it certainly isn't the only one out there that could be adopted for a cRPG convert. 

Also, as much as having a big established  setting can help in the making of a game, it can also be a huge detriment, in the form of constraints - Having to adhere to the existing lore means there's a lot of things you just cannot do story or plot-wise, having an existing ruleset means you are going to have to translate that to work within your game, with all the problems that come with that, instead of coming up with a good working one specifically for your game.

And that's not even talking about the copyright/licensing issues.

 

So - a wave of dnd games ? unlikely, though you won't hear me complaining if it does happen.

If the release of Pillars leads to a wave of good or even decent cRPG's, regardless of what setting they are set in though, I'll be just as happy.

[Monte Carlo]

^ No. A thousand times. Can you spot the difference between a real game of soccer and FIFA 2015?

 

This is what we're talking about.

[lazyman]

PoE will never spawn anything exactly for the reason mentioned here - they didn't use D&D rules (or other well known P'n'P ruleset).

Creating your own RPG system is dream of many players, but those few who actually attempt to make one soon realize it's *hard*. And that's why D&D is safe bet - there are entire generations who grew up with D&D of some sort, both in computers games and pen&paper. There there were millions and millions games (as in sessions) played with these rules and all "exploits" (let's call them weak links) of each edition are well known and can be avoided to a degree. PoE would have been vastly more successful with D&D simply because the target audience is/was people who are familiar with D&D or their children.

[illathid]

 

People forget the first ever iteration of D&D was a miniatures game invented by a guy who liked Napoleonic and Civil War wargames with lead soldiers in his Lake Geneva basement. The very essence of D&D has always been infused with tactical wargaming. First it was deeply basic, as it was meant to be mass combat rules then it coalesced into this squad-based game.

 

 

This is one of my favorite pieces of obscure gaming lore: GenCon was originally a wargaming event based in Lake Geneva and was called the Geneva Convention.

Edited April 19, 2015 by illathid