This game is D&D but it uses the 4e rule set. D&D 4e had some major revamp from D&D 3.5e. Pretty much the core systems have been changed. Prestige class becomes Paragon class. Feats and Abilities are changed. At-Will powers are added. Action points are added. There's too many changes. Lore wise Faerun had undergone massive upheaval after the death of Mystra. As for random dice rolling for stat/ability points that's always how D&D PnP do it. There's basically two systems.. the NWN style (all ability scores start at 8 with 32 or 34 for players to freely distribute) or the traditional style (random rolls).
^^^^ +1
That was the case for any of the versions though.... a human DM and a good group with a variety of books and resources and some creativity can bend and adapt even a broken rule set (whichever you prefer, all of the editions have flaws) into an amazing experience.
However wizards don't need buddies. The summoned demon is a meat shield, knock the lock, and if you need healing, you did not disintegrate fast enough :P
Eh, potions aren't that expensive when you can freaking fly around killing Balors for gold.
I find it amazing the amount of whining in this thread.
D&D isn't and never has been simply about the rules. The original rules were loosely written and DMs were encouraged to use whatever rules they wanted. Pretty much every campaign used a different interpretation of the rules. It seems to me people are more bothered about exploiting rules than roleplaying, storytelling and lore. This games has heaps of atmosphere, massive potential for growth with the Foundry concept. I am enjoying it and to me it feels as much if not more D&D than DDO, which is basically just an exercise in min maxing, rules lawyering and outright exploitation, because people are able to tell stories.
This game is D&D but it uses the 4e rule set. D&D 4e had some major revamp from D&D 3.5e. Pretty much the core systems have been changed. Prestige class becomes Paragon class. Feats and Abilities are changed. At-Will powers are added. Action points are added. There's too many changes. Lore wise Faerun had undergone massive upheaval after the death of Mystra. As for random dice rolling for stat/ability points that's always how D&D PnP do it. There's basically two systems.. the NWN style (all ability scores start at 8 with 32 or 34 for players to freely distribute) or the traditional style (random rolls).
No. This does not use 4e. In 4e you don't have 1000 hit points as a level 1 rogue. Also, 4e didn't release any content for beyond level 30. You don't get to pick your skills either. In 4e you got to pick two or three at-will powers out of five or six. Then one encounter power out of four or five. Then a daily power out of four or five. Then you had utility powers that were actually useful outside of battle. I doubt I ever get to sprout wings and fly in this game.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
bloodletter24Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 44Arc User
edited May 2013
I also agree with OP.
Any fighter class should beable to wield any weapon he/she wants to, not forced to wield a twohanded sword. D&D is about you making the persona you want to play. Its always been about choices for each player. I think some of you guys are missing the point of D&D "Choices" Any edition of D&D I have played all the way back to just D&D. Never have I had a dm tell me "Well if you want to play that fighter class you have to wield a dagger and a dagger only. GF and GWF should have many options of weapons that they can wield not just twohanded swords and longswords. I mean why can I not use a staff instead of this stupid orb as a control wizard. All you see is a bunch of wizards running around with all the same gear. This is stupid!
. Spend a couple of hundred dollars on the books, read them every single day for a year or so, take some time to design custom world maps, write up some plots, download pymapper, design custom dungeon tiles, make some dungeons, customize some monsters with Adventure Tools, and I think you'll find this system offers a lot more than the previous versions of D&D ever did.
Havent played 4ed...but I am thinking you are not correct here. I could do all those things you said with campain Cartographer and ...oh, I forget the name of the 3.5 ed toolset (obviously not made by WoTC) that allowed for creating everything from mobs to treasure to maps.
If you like the older editions go play them, but thanks to people griping about 4e so long we're being handed yet another version of D&D which is incredibly dumbed down and made to play like WOW, and WotC will no longer be providing any content for 4e which I personally invested hundreds of dollars and countless hours in. Hope you like that garbage they call D&D Next. I've playtested it, and it's terribad. Back to the old days when the Wizard's buddies were nothing but a heal bot, lockpick, and meat shield.
Nobody was asking for 4th edition...true to the point. they came out with it when 3.5 was working great and had a larger following. They, WotC and Hasbro, wanted to bleed DnD fans for another round of books, they looked and saw what we caved in with 3.0 and 3.5 and decided they shovel shint down our throats and it didnt work out so well. Now they are going to have another go at it with 5th and I expect it to be worse and I already know I have bought my last WotC/Hasbro generated DnD book.
If I havent offended you today....dont worry!!!....there's always tomorrow. Of course, you could also go to here for all I care.
I find it amazing the amount of whining in this thread.
D&D isn't and never has been simply about the rules. The original rules were loosely written and DMs were encouraged to use whatever rules they wanted. Pretty much every campaign used a different interpretation of the rules. It seems to me people are more bothered about exploiting rules than roleplaying, storytelling and lore. This games has heaps of atmosphere, massive potential for growth with the Foundry concept. I am enjoying it and to me it feels as much if not more D&D than DDO, which is basically just an exercise in min maxing, rules lawyering and outright exploitation, because people are able to tell stories.
D&D may not be about the rules, but it is about the roles.
Neverwinter can be a fun game set in a D&D setting and still not feel like D&D.
Rogue is usually my preferred class - even in DDO.
But the Neverwinter TR doesn't feel like a Rogue. It's kinda sad when a non-D&D game like KoA:Reckoning feels more D&D than a D&D RPG.
My CW does accomplish its MMO role. I am able to use Chill for crowd control.
I typically wouldn't choose Ice as my motif, but, this is OK - I guess.
I think they'd really have to over-haul Illusions for it to work well with an action RPG.
Nevewinter is a fun game. The setting is wonderfully given life.
But, the complaints about not feeling like a D&D RPG are valid.
Any fighter class should beable to wield any weapon he/she wants to, not forced to wield a twohanded sword. D&D is about you making the persona you want to play. Its always been about choices for each player. I think some of you guys are missing the point of D&D "Choices" Any edition of D&D I have played all the way back to just D&D. Never have I had a dm tell me "Well if you want to play that fighter class you have to wield a dagger and a dagger only. GF and GWF should have many options of weapons that they can wield not just twohanded swords and longswords. I mean why can I not use a staff instead of this stupid orb as a control wizard. All you see a bunch of wizards running around with all the same gear. This is stupid!
That's not entirely true. Yes it's about choices, But some classes just don't get weapon proficiencies just because it seems like they should. Even in tabletop D&D there are various weapon proficiencies. Just because a fighther can wield a long sword by default in D&D doesn't mean he can also automatically wield a B*****d Sword (yes the forums censors the name). It may seem like it because both are swords, but in D&D, the B*****d sword falls under a separate proficiency and thus, in order to wield it, the fighter would have to take the particular weapon proficiency feat in order to do so. Same with any weapons that are considered Martial, Exotic, etc.
Not saying that's the case here, but it does make sense to a point. A level 1 Fighter is not going to start out being able to wield all weapons that might seem apparent a fighter would know how to use. As they progress in the game (tabletop) they have choices of picking up additional proficiencies that allow them to use a greater variety of weapons. Now my experience is all based on D&D 3.5 and below. Not 4th edition. If this game is based on that, and from what others are saying, there were a lot of changes in the mechanics and rules.
But to me, the weapon limitations seem to be keeping line with proficiencies and starting characters.
Why is it that the only alignment that you can be in this game is good? In most, if not all other DnD games you had a choice of being Good, Neutral, Evil and other variations of those alignments. I don't want to be a goody-two-shoes.
0
igrat420Member, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited May 2013
What most players are overlooking is that items their characters equip aren't anymore then a "prop". The prop is a designated feature that is not restricted in appearance. The appearance of wielding an axe or a sword, flail, mace, etc, has more to do with art then function. It would be realtively easy to change the appearance, and name, of any item by a feature which would change a weapon's appearance (ie, the prop) to that of a different weapon of appropriate class type.
This game is launching and so far it plays relatively well for me at the lower levels. If Cryptic utilized a good production manager to oversee development it would make a lot of sense why classes are limited to a single choice of art for the time being. We must also keep in mind that the business model for this game is based around microtransactions which trend towards purchased customizations.
That being said, the direction of this thread should be more towards requesting "art" for "insert" weapon choice and NOT around gaming playstyles.
p.s. The game already has the feature to change weapon appearances from one weapon you like the stats of to another you like the appearance of...
Why is it that the only alignment that you can be in this game is good? In most, if not all other DnD games you had a choice of being Good, Neutral, Evil and other variations of those alignments. I don't want to be a goody-two-shoes.
Probably because it would be a HUGE undertaking to create a MMO that allowed this. This would mean separate cities, zones, landmasses, etc. for the separate alignments. In D&D a Paladin would try and kill an Evil player, They would never group nor even exists in the same city without going at each other. This generally is the rule of thumb in D&D tabletop. Most GM's won't allow groups of Good\Evil mix. Now, they could probably do it without the implied restrictions, and just let everyone pick their alignment and coexist together in harmony, but then that would be even less D&D like than restricting players to just one alignment.
Probably because it would be a HUGE undertaking to create a MMO that allowed this. This would mean separate cities, zones, landmasses, etc. for the separate alignments. In D&D a Paladin would try and kill an Evil player, They would never group nor even exists in the same city without going at each other. This generally is the rule of thumb in D&D tabletop. Most GM's won't allow groups of Good\Evil mix. Now, they could probably do it without the implied restrictions, and just let everyone pick their alignment and coexist together in harmony, but then that would be even less D&D like than restricting players to just one alignment.
You make a good point. But I think that would add more flavour to the game, even with differently aligned players living in harmony. I haven't gotten very far into the game yet so I might have missed something, but why would the have to add separate cities, zones etc. just because there are some players who are good and others who are evil and/or neutral?
Why is it that the only alignment that you can be in this game is good? In most, if not all other DnD games you had a choice of being Good, Neutral, Evil and other variations of those alignments. I don't want to be a goody-two-shoes.
Yes, I think they should have more sandbox elements of this game that pit good against evil and allow neutral players to just stay out of it.
You make a good point. But I think that would add more flavour to the game, even with differently aligned players living in harmony. I haven't gotten very far into the game yet so I might have missed something, but why would the have to add separate cities, zones etc. just because there are some players who are good and others who are evil and/or neutral?
I agree, but I think their choice of one alignment is more a dev choice in reducing dev time and resources needed to get it out the door. As to your second question, I am just going by the rule of thumb in D&D tabletop. Generally, if a truly good person runs across a truly evil person, they are almost "required" to kill each other. So, while having them playing side by side in this game would add more flavor, it would generally go against the long standing rule of thumb established in D&D core. So, in order for the devs to follow the core "rule" they would have to keep the populations of each alignment separate. But again, I believe their choice of one alignment is just more due to making it easier to develop and publish the game.
So again, they could allow for it and just throw em all together, but then there would probably be even more threads about how that game factor would truly be un-D&D like.
re: v3.5 My only exposure to 3.5 was D&D Online...... a giant mess of gotta-min-max-it-all or be useless beyond level 10. All about the metagaming and planning your "build" out before you even rolled stats. Meh, no thanks.
Your fault for expecting a video game to taste like the pen and paper experience, which will never happen in a massively multiplayer online environment.
Cut out for a video game? Yes.
Cut out for an MMORPG? No.
Completely, utterly wrong.
The ACTUAL D&D online proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the conversion can be done very well.
As to why everyone expects the online to have something in common with the pen and paper? Well, maybe its because they promise that it will by choosing to make a game using the freaking title! How misleading would it be to create a game called "Car Wars" and then load it up only to find it was about Cowboys and Indians? Same here except that in this case it is a rules set issue. D&D is NOT a setting...nor has it EVER been. It is a ruleset...and by choosing to use that huge D&D logo, you are making a promise to the buyer...one which has not been lived up to.
Now if they had dropped the D&D and just stuck with Forgotten Realms, then those folks complaining would be wrong and the various points about the setting being the only important thing would be right.
The ACTUAL D&D online proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the conversion can be done very well.
As to why everyone expects the online to have something in common with the pen and paper? Well, maybe its because they promise that it will by choosing to make a game using the freaking title! How misleading would it be to create a game called "Car Wars" and then load it up only to find it was about Cowboys and Indians? Same here except that in this case it is a rules set issue. D&D is NOT a setting...nor has it EVER been. It is a ruleset...and by choosing to use that huge D&D logo, you are making a promise to the buyer...one which has not been lived up to.
Now if they had dropped the D&D and just stuck with Forgotten Realms, then those folks complaining would be wrong and the various points about the setting being the only important thing would be right.
tats the prob if they just say mmo
everyone will not harass them but they come out big on DnD
promoting this as a true DnD game created online
wow and it become the fans fault for believing
good job cryptic as cool as every countries goverment
0
sasheriaMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 1Arc User
The ACTUAL D&D online proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the conversion can be done very well.
As to why everyone expects the online to have something in common with the pen and paper? Well, maybe its because they promise that it will by choosing to make a game using the freaking title! How misleading would it be to create a game called "Car Wars" and then load it up only to find it was about Cowboys and Indians? Same here except that in this case it is a rules set issue. D&D is NOT a setting...nor has it EVER been. It is a ruleset...and by choosing to use that huge D&D logo, you are making a promise to the buyer...one which has not been lived up to.
Now if they had dropped the D&D and just stuck with Forgotten Realms, then those folks complaining would be wrong and the various points about the setting being the only important thing would be right.
Even with DDO, you can't have a "pure" conversion from PnP to MMO. Mages/Wizards in general ARE the most powerful class in D&D (if you live long enough and high enough level) They have some of the most awesome spells. (technically ANY spell caster can be pretty epic)
in DDO, they try to match it and found out that mages ARE overpowered and fighters are practically useless (in terms of damaging power) with the right spells (in PnP and good roleplay and dice roll) you can control, kill and wipe out most encounters without too much trouble (and have rest time) with except of boss/epic fights.
There has been so much tweaking that they are STILL tweaking all the classes and try to balance them for MMO play.
NWN is trying to simplified the system so it is easier to code. It is easier to code a single attack style vs multiple (one for each weapon type) As many of you know, there is a distinct style when using a Great Sword, Two-handed Sword, Axe, Two weapons, dagger, polearm (I can go on) etc etc. So right now, we have ONE weapon type per character with one type of attack style (easier to code) after release (and with micro transaction) I am sure other style will come out with different weapon skin.
In PnP, there are some advantages to use a lower damage weapon (like DDO) BUT in MMO, DPS would use the highest damage possible so other weapons may not even get used.
I mean if I had an option of using a level 60 amulet that does 150-200 damage vs a level 60 mace that does 200-250. What would you choose? (i.e. no other benefit other than weapon speed which doesn't even factor in NWN)
I agree, but I think their choice of one alignment is more a dev choice in reducing dev time and resources needed to get it out the door. As to your second question, I am just going by the rule of thumb in D&D tabletop. Generally, if a truly good person runs across a truly evil person, they are almost "required" to kill each other. So, while having them playing side by side in this game would add more flavor, it would generally go against the long standing rule of thumb established in D&D core. So, in order for the devs to follow the core "rule" they would have to keep the populations of each alignment separate. But again, I believe their choice of one alignment is just more due to making it easier to develop and publish the game.
So again, they could allow for it and just throw em all together, but then there would probably be even more threads about how that game factor would truly be un-D&D like.
You might be right. Oh well, maybe they'll add something in a future expansion or something (not very likely ).
0
frozentreatsMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero UsersPosts: 0Arc User
Yes, I bought a 4th ed book (stupid me) and saw what they did to the game after GG died, and sold it to some other sucker. I do not care for the changes for table top, though here, I actually kind of like most of them. But even 4th ed (from memory here, so I could miss a detail) you could have a variety of weapons, multi class, and roll a toon with all 18s on actual dice (rather than pick where to allocate 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 10, 10 pre-rolled garbage). There were more than 4 classes as I recall. Clerics could heal at level 1, as I recall. There were skills and feats to pick from, as I recall. And a dozen other important "little things" are sort of off in this implementation at the moment (and may later be filled in and improved). Its.... dumbed down to the original 2d zelda level.
For those of you who do like 3.5 and the details of building a character in depth and the whole 9 yards, give DDO a try. Its old, the graphics are lacking, but its what you seek and a fine game. This is also a fine game, but the 2 are nothing alike. I can enjoy both with understanding that they are different, but if you seek old school D&D, you came to the wrong place, period. (And for that reason, I think the neverwinter title is slightly misleading and will pull in many a disgruntled 3.5 player).
I am waiting for a good MMO based on the Pathfinder system. For some old-school D&D'ers like me, it feels like the true inheritor of the classic D&D games.
I agree... I play in a 4th edition tabletop campaign once a week and most of us agree we miss the days of 2nd edition. We are even debating running a 2nd edition campaign after this one.
Give Pathfinder a whirl. I'm DM'ing two different groups on similar adventure paths right now. I still kinda miss 2nd Ed., but Pathfinder took 3.5 & "fixed" it.
Because alot of people dont know alot about this game.
Like
PWE is a F2P P2W company of some ill repute.
NW is not based on 3.5 rules, but the much less popular 4.0
Cryptic is fast acquiring a reputation to equal PWE.
They see...Neverwinter, and I promise you, alot of them come here thinking it is going to be an updated NWN and just like having a car battery attached to your ****** rings...they are getting a shocking awakening. Dont worry, they'll leave as fast as they got here after looking around a bit and realizing it's not even close to NWN or DnD.
lol yup been here looked and going, this is a travesty, using the title to get people to look, the graphics are not even that great, which is why there is no zoom on your camera look, lol, this game has less quality than baldurs gate, if it was launched, side by side, not 10 years on, only game I can think of that has failed more in my expectations has been, guild wars 2.
This makes Wartune look like an epic
0
frozentreatsMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero UsersPosts: 0Arc User
At the expense of sounding silly.. a lot of you may find it interesting to know that there's an MMO in the works based on Paizo Publishing's Pathfinder D20 (Essentially D&D 3.75, made in response to the oversimplification of 4th edition.) Its more of a direct port of the pnp rules with obvious changes due to computer limitations. But the point of the game is that most of the content is player made, players will be plopped down in a big mostly untamed wilderness and then develop cities, trade routes, etc. Well check it out. They recently finished up their second kickstarter pretty succesfully.
You can read the dev blog and about some of the mechanics and design goals at the Goblin Works blog. THATS where you wanna look for a straight up old school D&D experience. THIS game is based on 4th edition. Which was obviously simplified to a more combat oriented system in an attempt to attract people from a broader audience who previously probably thought that sitting at a table pretending to be a wizard was lame. Unfortunately it only really served to tick off alot of old timey rules heavy players.
At the expense of sounding silly.. a lot of you may find it interesting to know that there's an MMO in the works based on Paizo Publishing's Pathfinder D20 (Essentially D&D 3.75, made in response to the oversimplification of 4th edition.) Its more of a direct port of the pnp rules with obvious changes due to computer limitations. But the point of the game is that most of the content is player made, players will be plopped down in a big mostly untamed wilderness and then develop cities, trade routes, etc. Well check it out. They recently finished up their second kickstarter pretty succesfully.
You can read the dev blog and about some of the mechanics and design goals at the Goblin Works blog. THATS where you wanna look for a straight up old school D&D experience. THIS game is based on 4th edition. Which was obviously simplified to a more combat oriented system in an attempt to attract people from a broader audience who previously probably thought that sitting at a table pretending to be a wizard was lame. Unfortunately it only really served to tick off alot of old timey rules heavy players.
After letting my initial gleeful giddiness subside. I looked at this deeper and right off the bat I'm not too certain of this game. BUT, I will wait and reserve judgement until a finished title. But right off the bat, no Classes...really? The Core mechanic of all things basically D&D is not going to be in the Pathfinder game? Not that what they have planned is bad, it's just not following the core rules of D&D or Pathfinder.
D&D was always about choice but where is it here you should be able to wield a dagger as a great weapon fighter wear plate as a mage (yes it would be silly and never work)
To be honest, if I had been waiting for this game for as long as some people have been, or even plopped down 200$ for drow at launch, I would be really disgusted. But as it stands, it's not a terrible game, it's fun, and it looks good, and the characters look pretty nice, but some things really annoy me.
I am waiting for a good MMO based on the Pathfinder system. For some old-school D&D'ers like me, it feels like the true inheritor of the classic D&D games.
bpphantomMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited May 2013
Honestly I've gotten quite used to not reconfiguring and coordinating spell lists for hours. While Pathfinder was a bit of an improvement over 3.5 I still couldn't see why my monsters shouldn't just ignore everyone else and turn the healer into pasty goo. /shrug I just like D&D and whichever system I play, I play.
- bpphantom
Grace, Tiefling Devoted Cleric
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are. Then leave the rest to Batman."
Comments
Eh, potions aren't that expensive when you can freaking fly around killing Balors for gold.
D&D isn't and never has been simply about the rules. The original rules were loosely written and DMs were encouraged to use whatever rules they wanted. Pretty much every campaign used a different interpretation of the rules. It seems to me people are more bothered about exploiting rules than roleplaying, storytelling and lore. This games has heaps of atmosphere, massive potential for growth with the Foundry concept. I am enjoying it and to me it feels as much if not more D&D than DDO, which is basically just an exercise in min maxing, rules lawyering and outright exploitation, because people are able to tell stories.
No. This does not use 4e. In 4e you don't have 1000 hit points as a level 1 rogue. Also, 4e didn't release any content for beyond level 30. You don't get to pick your skills either. In 4e you got to pick two or three at-will powers out of five or six. Then one encounter power out of four or five. Then a daily power out of four or five. Then you had utility powers that were actually useful outside of battle. I doubt I ever get to sprout wings and fly in this game.
Any fighter class should beable to wield any weapon he/she wants to, not forced to wield a twohanded sword. D&D is about you making the persona you want to play. Its always been about choices for each player. I think some of you guys are missing the point of D&D "Choices" Any edition of D&D I have played all the way back to just D&D. Never have I had a dm tell me "Well if you want to play that fighter class you have to wield a dagger and a dagger only. GF and GWF should have many options of weapons that they can wield not just twohanded swords and longswords. I mean why can I not use a staff instead of this stupid orb as a control wizard. All you see is a bunch of wizards running around with all the same gear. This is stupid!
Nobody was asking for 4th edition...true to the point. they came out with it when 3.5 was working great and had a larger following. They, WotC and Hasbro, wanted to bleed DnD fans for another round of books, they looked and saw what we caved in with 3.0 and 3.5 and decided they shovel shint down our throats and it didnt work out so well. Now they are going to have another go at it with 5th and I expect it to be worse and I already know I have bought my last WotC/Hasbro generated DnD book.
Neverwinter can be a fun game set in a D&D setting and still not feel like D&D.
Rogue is usually my preferred class - even in DDO.
But the Neverwinter TR doesn't feel like a Rogue. It's kinda sad when a non-D&D game like KoA:Reckoning feels more D&D than a D&D RPG.
My CW does accomplish its MMO role. I am able to use Chill for crowd control.
I typically wouldn't choose Ice as my motif, but, this is OK - I guess.
I think they'd really have to over-haul Illusions for it to work well with an action RPG.
Nevewinter is a fun game. The setting is wonderfully given life.
But, the complaints about not feeling like a D&D RPG are valid.
That's not entirely true. Yes it's about choices, But some classes just don't get weapon proficiencies just because it seems like they should. Even in tabletop D&D there are various weapon proficiencies. Just because a fighther can wield a long sword by default in D&D doesn't mean he can also automatically wield a B*****d Sword (yes the forums censors the name). It may seem like it because both are swords, but in D&D, the B*****d sword falls under a separate proficiency and thus, in order to wield it, the fighter would have to take the particular weapon proficiency feat in order to do so. Same with any weapons that are considered Martial, Exotic, etc.
Not saying that's the case here, but it does make sense to a point. A level 1 Fighter is not going to start out being able to wield all weapons that might seem apparent a fighter would know how to use. As they progress in the game (tabletop) they have choices of picking up additional proficiencies that allow them to use a greater variety of weapons. Now my experience is all based on D&D 3.5 and below. Not 4th edition. If this game is based on that, and from what others are saying, there were a lot of changes in the mechanics and rules.
But to me, the weapon limitations seem to be keeping line with proficiencies and starting characters.
This game is launching and so far it plays relatively well for me at the lower levels. If Cryptic utilized a good production manager to oversee development it would make a lot of sense why classes are limited to a single choice of art for the time being. We must also keep in mind that the business model for this game is based around microtransactions which trend towards purchased customizations.
That being said, the direction of this thread should be more towards requesting "art" for "insert" weapon choice and NOT around gaming playstyles.
p.s. The game already has the feature to change weapon appearances from one weapon you like the stats of to another you like the appearance of...
Probably because it would be a HUGE undertaking to create a MMO that allowed this. This would mean separate cities, zones, landmasses, etc. for the separate alignments. In D&D a Paladin would try and kill an Evil player, They would never group nor even exists in the same city without going at each other. This generally is the rule of thumb in D&D tabletop. Most GM's won't allow groups of Good\Evil mix. Now, they could probably do it without the implied restrictions, and just let everyone pick their alignment and coexist together in harmony, but then that would be even less D&D like than restricting players to just one alignment.
You make a good point. But I think that would add more flavour to the game, even with differently aligned players living in harmony. I haven't gotten very far into the game yet so I might have missed something, but why would the have to add separate cities, zones etc. just because there are some players who are good and others who are evil and/or neutral?
Yes, I think they should have more sandbox elements of this game that pit good against evil and allow neutral players to just stay out of it.
I agree, but I think their choice of one alignment is more a dev choice in reducing dev time and resources needed to get it out the door. As to your second question, I am just going by the rule of thumb in D&D tabletop. Generally, if a truly good person runs across a truly evil person, they are almost "required" to kill each other. So, while having them playing side by side in this game would add more flavor, it would generally go against the long standing rule of thumb established in D&D core. So, in order for the devs to follow the core "rule" they would have to keep the populations of each alignment separate. But again, I believe their choice of one alignment is just more due to making it easier to develop and publish the game.
So again, they could allow for it and just throw em all together, but then there would probably be even more threads about how that game factor would truly be un-D&D like.
Now where'd my v2 go? THAC0, baby!
Completely, utterly wrong.
The ACTUAL D&D online proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the conversion can be done very well.
As to why everyone expects the online to have something in common with the pen and paper? Well, maybe its because they promise that it will by choosing to make a game using the freaking title! How misleading would it be to create a game called "Car Wars" and then load it up only to find it was about Cowboys and Indians? Same here except that in this case it is a rules set issue. D&D is NOT a setting...nor has it EVER been. It is a ruleset...and by choosing to use that huge D&D logo, you are making a promise to the buyer...one which has not been lived up to.
Now if they had dropped the D&D and just stuck with Forgotten Realms, then those folks complaining would be wrong and the various points about the setting being the only important thing would be right.
tats the prob if they just say mmo
everyone will not harass them but they come out big on DnD
promoting this as a true DnD game created online
wow and it become the fans fault for believing
good job cryptic as cool as every countries goverment
Even with DDO, you can't have a "pure" conversion from PnP to MMO. Mages/Wizards in general ARE the most powerful class in D&D (if you live long enough and high enough level) They have some of the most awesome spells. (technically ANY spell caster can be pretty epic)
in DDO, they try to match it and found out that mages ARE overpowered and fighters are practically useless (in terms of damaging power) with the right spells (in PnP and good roleplay and dice roll) you can control, kill and wipe out most encounters without too much trouble (and have rest time) with except of boss/epic fights.
There has been so much tweaking that they are STILL tweaking all the classes and try to balance them for MMO play.
NWN is trying to simplified the system so it is easier to code. It is easier to code a single attack style vs multiple (one for each weapon type) As many of you know, there is a distinct style when using a Great Sword, Two-handed Sword, Axe, Two weapons, dagger, polearm (I can go on) etc etc. So right now, we have ONE weapon type per character with one type of attack style (easier to code) after release (and with micro transaction) I am sure other style will come out with different weapon skin.
In PnP, there are some advantages to use a lower damage weapon (like DDO) BUT in MMO, DPS would use the highest damage possible so other weapons may not even get used.
I mean if I had an option of using a level 60 amulet that does 150-200 damage vs a level 60 mace that does 200-250. What would you choose? (i.e. no other benefit other than weapon speed which doesn't even factor in NWN)
Please review my campaign and I'll return the favor.
You might be right. Oh well, maybe they'll add something in a future expansion or something (not very likely
I am waiting for a good MMO based on the Pathfinder system. For some old-school D&D'ers like me, it feels like the true inheritor of the classic D&D games.
edit: fixed typo
+1
This right here.
Give Pathfinder a whirl. I'm DM'ing two different groups on similar adventure paths right now. I still kinda miss 2nd Ed., but Pathfinder took 3.5 & "fixed" it.
lol yup been here looked and going, this is a travesty, using the title to get people to look, the graphics are not even that great, which is why there is no zoom on your camera look, lol, this game has less quality than baldurs gate, if it was launched, side by side, not 10 years on, only game I can think of that has failed more in my expectations has been, guild wars 2.
This makes Wartune look like an epic
Awesome, thanks for this!
After letting my initial gleeful giddiness subside. I looked at this deeper and right off the bat I'm not too certain of this game. BUT, I will wait and reserve judgement until a finished title. But right off the bat, no Classes...really? The Core mechanic of all things basically D&D is not going to be in the Pathfinder game? Not that what they have planned is bad, it's just not following the core rules of D&D or Pathfinder.
congrats, you answered your own question.
yep, could not agree more
What Class Are You?
Grace, Tiefling Devoted Cleric
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are. Then leave the rest to Batman."